Many couples wishing to adopt have to go through years of interrogation and miles of red tape. Madonna is waved right through because she is rich and famous. Is this correct? And is an adopted child the new designer accessory?
2006-10-13 23:11:00 · 13 answers · asked by simon2blues 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Absolutely not.
Same thing for organ donations.
2006-10-13 23:13:52 · answer #1 · answered by Rafael C 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No one should have the rules wavered to the detriment of the child, but as we all know money not only fame talks. With this in mind I believe that the lawyers would make fast work of the adoption. I think that anyone who takes parenting seriously knows that a child would never be an accessory, and this designer term is something yet again the media has invented to keep us all gossiping about our abnormal views on celebrity.
2006-10-13 23:24:13 · answer #2 · answered by H 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't agree with it at all, Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman started the trend I think, then there's Angelina Jolie who has adopted 2 kids only to have her own a few moths later! I think that Madonna adopting a child just because she can is very unfair to the thousands of people out there who are unable to have children of their own and have to go through years of the asoption process. Celebrities invariably don't even look after their own kids they pay someone do it. Children need love and a stable environment and more often than not, celebrity relationships don't last forever!
2006-10-13 23:15:22 · answer #3 · answered by KT 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No these celebrities like Madonna should not have the rules waived for adoption, it makes me sick, there she was smiling for the camera making out she was some wonderful person, who will be looking after that poor child, not her but a nanny no doubt, who are we to know what these celebrities are really like behind closed doors, its not so long ago that she was half dressed and flaunting herself for the media and thinking it cool, talk about money talking, it really does make me sick to see these rich celebrities banding about adopted babies like they are miracle workers and gods, how long before the poor kids are no longer in vogue because of the problems they will bring with them, very sad, very sick and really is about time designer items for the stars were wrapped tightly in red tape to stop them playing god.
2006-10-14 18:35:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think you're right it is the new designer accessory and celbraties are jumping on the band wagon and adopting just to say look at us! Adoption is a very serious commitment and shouldn't be taken lightly! I know it's corny but children are for life not just for christmas. They will eventually grow up and become a person!
2006-10-14 00:37:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO WAY! The laws and rules governing adoption are there for a purpose - to protect the child. If a law is valuable it should not be waived for anybody. If a law is not valuable it should be changed. It makes me sick to think of these 'celebrities' waltzing around playing with children as if they were a cabbage patch doll. Ditto the creepy celebrities that name their kids stupid 'novelty' names. EG Shile Pitt (spoonerise it).
Unfortunately it is typical of the way americans worship anyone who is rich or notorious.
2006-10-13 23:19:47 · answer #6 · answered by TC 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. These celebrities are not adopting children. They are buying slaves.
Also, look at the other celebrities who are adopting or interested in adopting. Angelina? Jessica Simpson? They are not exactly great role models.
Do adoption agencies allow adulterers to adopt kids?
2006-10-17 04:48:25 · answer #7 · answered by 6th Finger 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
simple answer is no. In this country she would have to go thru the same process as anyone else but cos she wants to adopt out in Malawi, money talks, need i say any more. Seems to be the trend recently to adopt kids from overseas, prolly cos its easier for them!
2006-10-13 23:14:47 · answer #8 · answered by english_rose10 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, no longer me. yet for the toddlers who've such little probability of a smart existence, i think of it fairly is a solid element. I merely desire they do no longer finally end up nutty or bratty like different privileged toddlers do. which would be tragic to take a newborn from abject poverty and then kill it with "kindness".
2016-12-13 08:02:25 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way .She could be a bad mother just because she is well known. She should not be treated any differently.What will happen if she gets fed up with her accessory? Will it be brought back to where she go it?
2006-10-14 00:46:00 · answer #10 · answered by MaryC O 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋