Because it stinks of publicity stunt for a start. Also, why go abroad to get a child - there are so many children right here who need a loving home and help. Also how come she didnt have to wait the standard times like other couples would have to ?? Seems money talks heh ????
2006-10-18 03:48:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
People have very strange priorities. They seem to think being adopted by a multimillionairess is the worst thing that'll happen to a child in Africa this week - as opposed to making a fuss about the 20,000 or so that will die of malaria in those 7 days, for instance.
2006-10-18 11:03:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by gvih2g2 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The little boy already has a family he is not an orphan. He is being taken awary from his culture and family to live in a completely alien environment. I think Madonna would have more credibility if for example she gave the community he lived in a million dollars in aide...teach them and help them to be self sufficient which would potentially benefit generations of people
2006-10-18 10:55:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by sass_blue 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because she could have just donated the money to Malawi instead of making out she is some god and adopting a child, it smacks of free publicity and blackmail to me, give me a child so I can show him off and make out I'm supreme, I will give you money in return, its not like she is even going to be there for that poor child, that will the Nanny's job won't it.
2006-10-18 10:53:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
a lot of people think she's gotten this child so quick, when most people wait a long time thru the adoption process, but for all we know, she's been going through the process privately for months. others think she's just using the kid like the latest hollywood accessory...they need to just give her a break. this kid is gonna have a much better shot at life now, and it ticks me off how much paparazzi was swarming the poor kid, like that's good for anyone.
2006-10-18 10:50:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by liberpez 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
b'cos the kid still has family around him - how would she like it if she died and her kids were adopted by Africans in a village somewhere? she is taking him away from his family, his people, his culture. she could really mess him up for the future (i.e. why him and not someone else etc)
b'cos she is doing for herself only - why not support the village in some way - no doubt this kid will be adorned in the same designer gear as her other kids - money which could go towards food, education, water etc.
its a shame b'cos she truly is in a position to make such a difference, but shes so greedy for the publicity that it doesnt matter who gets hurt. if she wanted to help she could have just given aid either publicly or privately.
2006-10-18 10:49:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by third space 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
No idea. It's a little bit strange that his natural Father doesn't want to keep him though.
As long as it's a choice between a children's home and adoption, I believe that adoption is the best alternative.
2006-10-18 10:52:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by Copper 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because she is basically buying it. If she hadn't made such a big donation, she would never have been allowed to do it.
Also, is bringing an African child into the media spotlight, outside of its own culture the right thing to do, especially as it will be brought up by nannies.
It is a big PR stunt.
2006-10-18 10:49:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by Kate 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
Because she's rich and a lot of people hate her.
Seriously. Who gives a damn. I'm sure her nannies are great moms. The fact that everybody's pretending to be all outraged, camping out at her house, etc, when even the father is all for it - it's just ridiculous.
2006-10-18 10:48:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by jonjon418 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
because she has bypassed the correct legal procedures of teh country - which is to liv there for 18 months, personally though i think they should be grateful she is adopting him, there ae thousands of unwanted kids there, plus she has donated large sums of money, which could be seen as bribery but when all said and done they do need the money!
2006-10-18 10:48:37
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋