Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Should high profile celebrities be allowed to adopt? Options · View
nicola
Posted: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 7:43:20 PM

Rank: Matriarch

Joined: 12/6/2006
Posts: 25,537
Location: The Orgasmatron
I look at celebrities like Angelina Jolie and Madonna, as well as a few other high profile "front cover" celebs, and I sometimes wonder if they are adopting for the right reasons.

It can do lots of good of course, raising awareness of the poverty in Africa for example, but do you think these celebs are going overboard? It seems to me some treat it like a publicity stunt, to reinvigorate their stumbling careers.

http://jezebel.com/5402318/angelina-to-adopt-baby-no-7

Dancing_Doll
Posted: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:00:50 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,293
Location: West Coast
It's definitely trendy right now for celebs to adopt children from unstable countries. I think with fertility rates on the decline and many celebs choosing to delay having kids longer so they can continue on with their careers, it makes sense that adoption might seem like it's on the rise. As well, adopting a child if probably a lot easier for a female celeb (no 9 months and then baby-weight to lose, which means basically a year without a salary if they haven't figured out some alternative way to work their fame).

While Brangelina seems to be going overboard with collecting children (from an outsider looking in), these children are still better off with their celeb parents than they are living in an impoverished village or orphanage in their home countries. Even if it's not a traditional kind of family environment, they still have more options available to them and of course much better healthcare. From what I recall, Zahara was close to death when Brangelina brought her home and worked her through various health issues.

So, even if the celebs are doing it for publicity or questionable child-hoarding tendencies, my feeling is... what's the alternative? Starvation? No education? Endless obstacles with regards to health, opportunity and living in a country in crisis? I'd rather have Brangelina or Madonna adopt me any day... icon_smile


DamonX
Posted: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:01:29 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2009
Posts: 795
I don't think you can ever claim to know the reasoning behind why celebrities do what they do. I think a lot of celebs are put under a unfair amount of scrutiny for their actions. If they want to adopt a Cambodian baby to use as a fashion accessory...well that seems a bit ridiculous. But we tend to assume the worst of celebs while really having no idea of their intentions.

Let's face it. We like to see the powerful fall. Did anyone shed a tear when Lindsey Lohan went to jail or when Mel Gibson ruined his career by ranting on the phone? Not a chance. We all laughed and are probably looking forward to the next SNL skit that makes fun of them.

Let them adopt whoever they want. The fact that they want to adopt a "non-white" baby shouldn't be seen as a character flaw or a publicity stunt. And if it is a stunt...well, that's one Cambodian baby that will have a much better life than I had.
nicola
Posted: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:06:26 PM

Rank: Matriarch

Joined: 12/6/2006
Posts: 25,537
Location: The Orgasmatron
I think Angelina is doing it for all the right reasons. She's a UNHCR ambassador. It's not like she needs the publicity.
Magical_felix
Posted: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:10:14 PM

Rank: Wild at Heart

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,908
Location: California
Those kids won the lottery as far as I'm concerned. Really lucky to be adopted by powerful celebs like brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie.



Guest
Posted: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:14:56 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
im all for adoption and if the uber rich can afford to take in many unwanted kids and love and care for them i say right on! but must we outsource it? cant they look to the unwanted unloved children in their own countries? we have over 300,000 kids in our foster care system. and clearly someone like angelina isnt just adopting infants. would love to see some of that benevolence shown to our own children. in know that children in other countries are worse off than the children in foster care here but i do wish they would look to satisfying the needs of our children here first.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 11:33:43 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
Alot of them probably do it for the wrong reason but its better then that child having a bad life and never having a family. There are tons of kids in foster care that need homes so i would not call it wrong, those kids are going to live better lives then they probably ever dreamed of and they will be taken care of
She
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 12:51:10 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/24/2010
Posts: 2,160
Location: Europe
I do believe that they should adopt, even more I am very pleased that Angelina made a trend among all. There are too many children who needs our help in any posible way, so yes I am quite happy that celebreties are spreading the word among little people.. and we all know that what they do most people follow.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 7:14:07 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401


the story of picture : Many of you would recognize this heart-wrenching photo taken during the Sudan famine in 1994. It won South African photojournalist Kelvin Carter the Pulitzer prize, a prestigious award in photography. Captured in the photo are a child crawling towards a UN food camp few kms away and a vulture waiting for the child to die, so that it can eat her. Whether the child survived is not known to anyone, including the photographer who fled the place the minute the picture was taken. It is learnt that he later revealed to friends that he wished he had saved the child. Even though these journalists were warned not to touch the famine victims for the fear of contracting diseases, Carter himself felt afterwards that he could and should have done something more humanitarian. Three months after winning the Pulitzer prize, he committed suicide out of depression.

Now, I believe we are so lucky because we were born in a rich country, or we had a family. Celebrities can adopt for right reason or wrong reason. But I think it is not the solution. These children lose their parents because of illness or hunger. Did you think about the charge of Angelina’s make up and howmany people can be fed with it. The charge of one night electricity in Las Vegas is enough to solve the hunger problem in africa for a few month.

ABOUT 20% OF AFRICA'S CHILDREN DIE BEFORE THE AGE OF FIVE.

Adoption is one way to help these people but everybody knows nobody can give the love of a mother to a child. They need real parents, and Celebrities should try to solve the poverty problem in Africa. People are so selfish in our world, maybe me too.
She
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 7:41:55 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/24/2010
Posts: 2,160
Location: Europe
Aragon wrote:


the story of picture : Many of you would recognize this heart-wrenching photo taken during the Sudan famine in 1994. It won South African photojournalist Kelvin Carter the Pulitzer prize, a prestigious award in photography. Captured in the photo are a child crawling towards a UN food camp few kms away and a vulture waiting for the child to die, so that it can eat her. Whether the child survived is not known to anyone, including the photographer who fled the place the minute the picture was taken. It is learnt that he later revealed to friends that he wished he had saved the child. Even though these journalists were warned not to touch the famine victims for the fear of contracting diseases, Carter himself felt afterwards that he could and should have done something more humanitarian. Three months after winning the Pulitzer prize, he committed suicide out of depression.

Now, I believe we are so lucky because we were born in a rich country, or we had a family. Celebrities can adopt for right reason or wrong reason. But I think it is not the solution. These children lose their parents because of illness or hunger. Did you think about the charge of Angelina’s make up and howmany people can be fed with it. The charge of one night electricity in Las Vegas is enough to solve the hunger problem in africa for a few month.

ABOUT 20% OF AFRICA'S CHILDREN DIE BEFORE THE AGE OF FIVE.

Adoption is one way to help these people but everybody knows nobody can give the love of a mother to a child. They need real parents, and Celebrities should try to solve the poverty problem in Africa. People are so selfish in our world, maybe me too.


Great post Aragon and you are right celebrity addoption will not solve the problem but it can lighten up people minds and direct to the problem. We should not judge how much somebody is spending on make up or on car but what we in our life can give up to prevent another death because of hunger.
And yes, we are all selfish and greedy and much more, If we wouldn't be condor wouldn't be waiting for that child to die.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 8:36:35 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,293
Location: West Coast
I just wanted to mention that in the case of Brad and Angelina... the Jolie-Pitt Foundation has donated approximately $20-25 million dollars in four years to charitable organizations (the majority of them being in the developing nations where they adopted their children). They've set up a medical clinic in the Sudan for refugees, donated over $2 million to Doctor's Without Borders, and many additional large sums to orphanages in Africa and Cambodia.

Along with the donations, Angelina's work with the UN continues to shed light on the plight of impoverished nations.

They are certainly doing more than their fair share in those countries, and their continued involvement is quite strong. So they aren't just plucking these children up and walking away without concern for the rest of the country's welfare.

I think Madonna's adoption was met with more controversy than Brad and Angelina.

And Katherine Heigl adopted a special needs child from South Korea.

Definitely I think the red tape decreases with celebrity status. The only sense of frustration I can understand from people are from those couples looking to adopt children from foreign countries who feel like celebrities get priority treatment. Which they do, but it's just the reality of of having the benefit of fame and money.


WellMadeMale
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 8:38:42 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,299
Location: Cakeland, United States
Which are the governing agencies involved in an adoption if the adopter is from Country A and the child(ren) are from Country B.

Are there agencies from both countries? Are they both involved in the process?

What are the qualifying conditions to be met?

Are gay couples allowed to adopt?

Are single people allowed to adopt?

Is someone who has a felony or misdemeanor record allowed to adopt a child?

I ask, because I do not know.

I'm also not interested in adopting a child(ren) although I have been known to donate money to charities. I've never been asked if I was a convicted felon, what type of vehicle I owned, what my career/job is, or if I had AIDS if an organization wanted my money.

If the existing conditions and legalities are met by the individual or the couple, why can't everyone who wishes to do so...save or assist with bettering the life or lives of children around the entire planet, via adoption or donation?

If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 11:06:05 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
ok, i know im going to get slammed for this so ill try to say it in the most gentle way...but if i were a woman, living in an impoverished country where there is famine and starvation perhaps i would think twice before bringing a child into it.

i know the drive to have sex and to procreate is innate and one of our strongest and education in those countries is beyond poor, and of course there are women there that are raped and have no choice but to bear a child. im not discounting that but a lot of women do make the choice to have a child.

im just saying if you cant feed yourself then you will not be able to feed your baby and should consider that before hand. and not just the women of course. i know they have far less choice about whether or not they have sex that we do. to me, its irresponsible to bring a child into such conditions if you have the choice.
She
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 11:24:01 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/24/2010
Posts: 2,160
Location: Europe
LittleMissBitch wrote:
ok, i know im going to get slammed for this so ill try to say it in the most gentle way...but if i were a woman, living in an impoverished country where there is famine and starvation perhaps i would think twice before bringing a child into it.

i know the drive to have sex and to procreate is innate and one of our strongest and education in those countries is beyond poor, and of course there are women there that are raped and have no choice but to bear a child. im not discounting that but a lot of women do make the choice to have a child.

im just saying if you cant feed yourself then you will not be able to feed your baby and should consider that before hand. and not just the women of course. i know they have far less choice about whether or not they have sex that we do. to me, its irresponsible to bring a child into such conditions if you have the choice.


This is one of reasons when I was deciding in my early 20' not to give a birth to a child. And I do not live in that poor country, but my concerns for the future were.
However addoption I did not exclude, au contraire.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 11:32:41 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,293
Location: West Coast
LittleMissBitch wrote:
ok, i know im going to get slammed for this so ill try to say it in the most gentle way...but if i were a woman, living in an impoverished country where there is famine and starvation perhaps i would think twice before bringing a child into it.

i know the drive to have sex and to procreate is innate and one of our strongest and education in those countries is beyond poor, and of course there are women there that are raped and have no choice but to bear a child. im not discounting that but a lot of women do make the choice to have a child.

im just saying if you cant feed yourself then you will not be able to feed your baby and should consider that before hand. and not just the women of course. i know they have far less choice about whether or not they have sex that we do. to me, its irresponsible to bring a child into such conditions if you have the choice.


I agree LMB! Unfortunately cultural attitudes and lack of birth control in rural areas complicate everything. Missionaries brought Roman Catholicism into Africa which is one of the largest denominations and they criticize birth control methods. The Pope once did a 12 day tour through Africa condemning artificial birth control and sterilization. Even if someone wanted birth control, there is no access to it for most. There are few family planning clinics and they are hard to access for rural villagers.

As well, culturally a woman's worth is determined by her fertility. Because mortality rates are so high, the feeling is to have more kids, with the assumption that a few will survive to adulthood. Children also mean wealth in terms of manpower, and the feeling that they will take care of their parents as they get old. (Same thinking happened in North America prior to industrialization... the mindset being more 'hands to work the farm' etc).

Until attitudes change, there will be many impoverished children. I think whatever the western world can do in terms of donations, access to birth control, better medical care, or allowing more international adoptions (by celebrities, or by whoever is qualified and wants to adopt) should be allowed. They need to get rid of the red tape and think with more humanitarian reasoning.


x3holly
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 12:08:30 PM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 5/9/2010
Posts: 15
Location: United States
It's highly likely that some stars do it for the publicity. They get themselves in a sticky situation and do a good thing, it acts as a bandage. Is this the moral thing to do? No it is not, but since when are stars ever moral in their decisions. Their life isn't a life, it is a full on 24/7 career therefore they will do whatever it takes to advance and make their career thrive.

Speaking in terms of foreign countries, the children would waste their lives away and die young from diseases, overcrowding, starvation regardless. Being taken into a multi-million dollar celebrity's home would save them. it would give them a real chance at having a life and putting something into this world.

Although, there is no way to tell how they would fare emotional wise. Depending on every star, would they be loved and understand what it is like to touch with affection, to hug, to hold those that are down so they don't feel so alone. Or, would they simply be just a publicity stunt and be left with nanny after nanny while "mommy" and "daddy" are out working.

The answers are simply unknown, and never will be known. All we can do is look at various adopted children by starlets and see how they come out in the end. They are in sense a guinea pig to the world.

It isn't my decision, nor is it yours if someone else can adopt. If they can afford to bring the child up then we must simply have faith in human kind that they have the heart to bring in emotional support as well.
LadySharon
Posted: Thursday, July 22, 2010 3:04:33 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/5/2007
Posts: 2,121
Location: The Tundra, United States
Let the high profile celebrities adopt. I don.t know why Angie and Brad decided to adopt before giving birth to their three biological children (not my business to know), but I think it's good that they did. If I were a celebrity, I would adopt a child from my own country, regardless of age or special needs. Each child deserves a good life and the chance to grow up into a well-adjusted human being.

The Roommates Trilogy:
Roommates with Benefits
Roommates with Benefits: Snowed In
Roommates with Benefits: The Working Vacation is now available for your reading pleasure

Latest poem, Longing, is out now!

College Sex:



New story now available!
Guest
Posted: Friday, December 13, 2013 10:25:40 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
I don't mind high celebs adopting children but why can't they here. There are so many in the states that would love to be loved by someone.
Guest
Posted: Friday, December 13, 2013 10:45:13 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
Cause "here" might mean an unwelcome visit by the birth parent who now decides they want to take part in the child's love now that branjolie is a part of the equation.

3 years and resurrected. How's that for a Christmas miracle?
InTears
Posted: Sunday, December 15, 2013 2:25:38 PM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 12/3/2013
Posts: 20
Location: Netherlands
Even if you think they might not take care of them as much as most parents do, it would be completely retarded to forbid it to celeberties. Would you rather rot as an infant in Africa, getting more or less to choose between criminalizing and dying or have a shitty mother?
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.