do you think they do it just to stay in the papers? or because they have so much money they want a child to have a better life then the one they have now?
2006-10-17 23:58:10 · 16 answers · asked by cupcake 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Celebrities
I think that they do it for publicity. At the end of the day, the nanny spends more time with the child then they do. It's rare that a celeb really and truly cares about the plight of poor children. Instead of adopting one, they should put their money together and pay for these kids to get educated and to be able to work.
2006-10-18 01:18:41 · answer #1 · answered by Mizzy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well I think some celebrities (such as Steven Spielberg & Angelina Jolie) do it because they really care about children and with their money they can really give a disadvantaged child a great chance in life. Then there are other celebrities (ie. Madonna) who are jumping on a band wagon. In those cases it's okay because in the end a child that might have had a really horrible life is being given a really good opportunity to be raised in a rich and hopefully loving home.
2006-10-18 07:15:41 · answer #2 · answered by BarbKor 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they do it thinking that they are doing the right thing. I'm not sure I agree with it though. Taking a child away from it's home and culture is not the answer. Maybe by putting money into trust for communites where these children are would be a better idea. Helping more than just one family and helping them to help themselves.
There is alot of poverty out there and no one celebrity can end it.
2006-10-18 07:05:22 · answer #3 · answered by Nedster 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Frankly, I really don't care if celebrities are adopting for public relations reasons. But, they are creating a better life for a child and taking on the responsibility of a life long commitment. I am just curious what these children will be like in the future. I mean looking at Christina Crawford, she wrote a book about her mother and it spawned a cult like movie about a starlet and how she was a neurotic, child abuser. Will there be more like in the future?
2006-10-18 09:22:22 · answer #4 · answered by lynnguys 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you mean adopting? If so I think that usually the women celebrities who adopt are far too busy working to take the time to go through a pregnancy like Nicole Kidman, Jodie Foster etc. and besides it is giving a chance to a child who might otherwise end up in the care system.
2006-10-18 07:01:46 · answer #5 · answered by Carrie S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I reckon Madonna is genuially doing it for good reasons. She has nearly come to the end of her career and she wants to start to settle down. Madonna came from nothing like me, like most of us, and she is REAL. That is my opinoin anyway.
An all the people that are making it into something it is not are just jealous, just like that little kiddies dad said. She got so much more to offer him than he did. And the real hero in all this is the farther. The courage that he must of had to be able to do that is touching. He truely loves his son to give him up, just so he could have a better life. The media are aload of Wa!nkers and they should get a grip. Angela jolie on the other hand, i dont here no one saying anything to her about adopting. the world realy needs to get a grip. serious tings.
2006-10-18 08:07:04 · answer #6 · answered by london lady 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I know some celebs are quite twisted, but to adopt a child purely for publicity would be sick. I think they feel they are doing it for the best reasons, but I can't help feeling there is something rather arrogant about it. I think it would be better if they used some of their wealth to help a whole village, build a school, sink wells, that kind of thing. Still, if one child gets a chance of a better life I don't suppose we can complain about it.
2006-10-18 07:12:38 · answer #7 · answered by peggy*moo 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whilst it is true they may be able to give the child a better life, just because they are celebrities does not mean they should be exempt from law. Once that happens it means the rich could evade the law altogether.
2006-10-18 07:04:17 · answer #8 · answered by Reg J 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they cant, is they can give a child a good life, which they want then yea take it, but there can be wrong and right reasons for adopting. a wrong reason is that u just want a baby and cant get ur own, a right reason is to help others.
2006-10-18 07:29:09 · answer #9 · answered by som1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they innocently wanted to raise an unfortunate child, surely the could adopt an orphan in their home countries?
It's all for publicity, to make them look fashionable and "holier than thou".
2006-10-18 07:08:30 · answer #10 · answered by genghis41f 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋