You really don’t spend much effort reading or comprehending people’s posts dude. I’ve already clearly stated that I am the parent of both biological children and an internationally adopted child. The subject is thus an issue of importance to me. I am also a pediatrician with a large population of international adoptees in my practice. I know a lot of adoptive parents and spend a lot of time discussing these issues. Your inference that I am implying something about what it may or may not mean to someone else is your problem, not an issue of my articulation. I also spend much time with all my children thank you very much.
I will clarify my point yet again for you. My issue is with anyone who portrays their adoption as a generous act of charity for some poor unfortunate soul. That she chooses to do so in a very public manner puts her up for public ridicule just as fairly as it sets her for Oprah to praise her publically.
None of which supports your thesis that Madonna doesn’t care about adoption.
I didn’t see the show, but I’m going to go out on a limb that you’re misrepesenting here. And which STILL doesn’t support your position that she doesn’t care about adoption.
Uh where exactly did you get that such was my “thesis”? I that suggest you actually read my postings in this thread.
I have no idea whether Madonna “cares about adoption”. I have clearly expressed my acknowledgement of the possiblity that I am getting the wrong impression. But I will state clearly again now that the way she phrased things and the manner in which she is going on Oprah and publicizing this “personal family matter” rubs many of us who have been involved with adoptions the wrong way. None of the other goofy crap she has done even has gotten me to click on the link to find out more. This annoys.
It is interesting after all that there are two people posting on this thread who acknowledge personal ties to adoption and both react in a similar vein; most of us involved with adoptions have a strong distaste for those who tell us “how lucky” our adopted kids are, even though we accept that they may be well intended. And those who imply how lucky their poor adopted child is, well they disgust many of us.
And then there are those who feel the need to defend a celebrity against attacks by “ill informed” “fucking idiots.”
Now which set seems more likely to be ill-informed about issues related to adoption?
And IF monkeys fly out of my butt, I might be the second coming of christ! We’re not talking about “ifs” here. You outright accused her of adopting for fashion and it’s a shitty thing to say…particularly by an adoptee. We could just as easily say, “If Sarafeena’s parents adopted because they thought it would get them to heaven faster, it’s a pretty deplorable thing to do to another human being.”
What if your parents DID have a choice (and make no mistake…they did)? Would they have chosen the child who had been ill his entire life? Would they have chosen the third-world kid? Did they even look at adopting an older child? I’m sure there were other kids…older children who needed homes…yet they CHOSE an infant.
Sarafeena, it’s not fashionable to adopt from disease- and war-torn countries. It’s necessary because they are in the most need.
You forget the part about her saying that she and her husband “fell in love” with this particular kid. Or is love not a good enough reason for you, either?
She wasn’t going to go on Oprah’s show at all when she decided to adopt. She was acting in self-defense.
Please show me where Madonna said that the child is lucky and she is not…show me where the fact that she realizes the child IS lucky is the only factor in her decision to adopt.
Man, the old saying is right. **“No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.” ** It doesn’t seem to me that Madonna did anything wrong, yet people are ripping into her for adopting a kid from a crappy country?
A former coworker of mine and his wife adopted an asian kid from some craphole (I can’t remember where). This guy was a bit of a jackass at times, but he and his wife love that kid to death. I suppose if he were rich and famous people would be ripping into him.
Whatever your expertise on “adoption,” you’ve no exclusive rights to this mantle of being The One Who Knows And Cares About Adoption, and those things don’t support any of your accusations of what Madonna’s done or what you think she’s done.
Yes, and hopefully she does. ALL I said was that one or two things she has said seemed distasteful to me. Sheesh
Again, not so. You can read in what you want…all I can say is that you have no evidence other than inference from ONE thing I have said about her in my history of posting here. I actually have always kind of liked her (liked her A LOT when I was younger, and have a bunch of her albums). I am not crazy about the type of music she has been making lately, but I think she is OK.
But IF I had already stated that it was a “private family matter” and wanted the press to stay out of it, then I wouldn’t.
IF someone is using another person to further their own agenda for something unrelated to that child, then I believe that is unethical.
Frankly, my post was overblown. Did you read my first post? All it really said was that it seems to me like he’s being used as a poster child for orphans in Africa, and I find that distasteful. The fact that someone jumped in immediately and called ME a fucking idiot because I haven’t followed Madonna’s EVERY move since 1985 actually kind of tells me that someone here has a much bigger axe to grind with me than I ever could with Madonna over this situation. Then someone else jumped in and decided to drag my parents into it, and this rather angry thread is the result of all that.
See, I think that would be unethical, if it would move someone up in line above someone else.
Absolutely that is the most important thing. But a lot of people would believe that circumventing existing regulations and laws in such a situation would be wrong, including me.
Yes, that was a great book. The difference is that, in open adoption, usually the parents are picking YOU, the adoptive family, not so much the other way around (yes, if you are lucky, you have some choice, but most people don’t). In Dan’s case, the mother picked them (which they were very relieved about, if I recall correctly, because they were afraid no one would want gay parents for their child). Even if you do get to choose the parents, I think that’s a far different thing from choosing the actual child. That adoption was arranged before the baby was born.
And it would have been! I certainly hope that’s not why they did it.
That is true. This has nothing to do with what I said. What I said is that the idea that you go to an orphanage, scan the children, and point to the one you want is not the best way to go about it. They used to do that in orphanages here, but the practice is no longer considered the best way to go about it, since children know they are being passed over.
It can’t be fashionable AND necessary? Will it still be necessary when it goes out of fashion?
Typical tap-dancing to avoid the fact that you’re doing exactly what you’re so outraged about with regard to people second-guessing motivation.
Kids are “shopped” for adoption all the time. You’ve never heard of adoption fairs? Puhleeze. You are deluded about your parents’ altruism. You were chosen because you were a healthy infant. If your parents were willing to take the first available child, you’d be a sick 14-year-old male black child with a history of violence.
You have managed to miss the entire point. I NEVER said my parents were altruistic. They were not. They NEVER claimed to be, and I didn’t either. OF COURSE they wanted an infant…they did NOT adopt me to be altruistic or to rescue a child. They adopted me because they WANTED A BABY. This is wht DSeid was saying all along…that it usually is from a person’s own selfish motives that they adopt…NOT because they are doing a good deed. YOU were the one who started ascribing all kinds of other thoughts and motives to my parents.
And, the problem I have is with letting the child KNOW that you did it as a charity case.
