ONTD

8:16 am - 10/25/2006

Madonna: The Adoption Controversy

Madonna: The Adoption Controversy
From Oprah.Com



From provocative videos to headline-making risqué concerts, Madonna is known for pushing people's buttons. Now it's her actions off stage that are putting her back in the center of controversy.

In the fall of 2006, Madonna traveled to the African nation of Malawi where she is building an orphan care center with her foundation Raising Malawi. Soon after her trip, news broke that she and husband, Guy Ritchie, were adopting a 13-month-old boy named David.

Local human rights groups have since gone to court, challenging the Malawian government's decision to allow Madonna to adopt David. They believe that Madonna used her wealth and celebrity to fast track the adoption. News outlets have also recently reported that David's birth father, whom originally was in support of the adoption, claims to not have fully understood what he was saying when he encouraged the adoption.

Madonna, accustomed to being criticized in the media, says she never expected to be criticized for her family's choice to adopt a son.

"I didn't realize that the adoption was causing any controversy until I came back," she says. "There were a million film crews in the airport and press camped outside my door. I don't read newspapers or watch television, but all of my friends have let me know what everybody's talking about and what's going on in the news. So it didn't really hit me until I got back to England. It's pretty shocking."

Does celebrity affect the adoption process?

Madonna and Guy Ritchie have been granted an "interim adoption" by the Malawian government—David will live in their care for an initial 18 months while a London-based social worker will visit them periodically to ensure David is being cared for and not neglected. After the 18 months, Madonna and Guy may then legally adopt David.

Madonna says that her critics don't really understand how the Malawian adoption process works if they believe she used status to speed up the process of adopting David. "I assure you it doesn't matter who you are or how much money you have, nothing goes fast in Africa," Madonna says. "There are no adoption laws in Malawi. And I was warned by my social worker that because there were no known laws in Malawi, they were more or less going to have to make them up as we went along. And she did say to me, 'Pick Ethiopia. Go to Kenya. Don't go to Malawi because you're just going to get a hard time.'"



The state of baby David's health

Madonna says that she and Guy had planned on adopting a child two years ago, not knowing where they would adopt. It was her ongoing philanthropic work in Malawi that finally brought the Ritchies to David.

"I'm financing a documentary about orphans in Malawi, so I was allowed to view footage and photographs of a lot of the children. An 8-year-old girl who is living with HIV was holding this child. I became transfixed by him. … But I didn't yet know I was going to adopt him. I was just drawn to him."

David had spent most of his life in an orphanage with 500 other orphans. Madonna didn't know the state of David's health when she was visiting Malawi and considering adopting David. She brought a pediatrician to test all of the children's health for their overall well being, and later learned that David tested negative for tuberculosis, malaria, HIV and other common illnesses striking African orphans.

"When I met him, he was extremely ill," Madonna says. "He had severe pneumonia, and he could hardly breathe. I was in a state of panic, because I didn't want to leave him in the orphanage because I knew they didn't have medication to take care of him. We got permission to take him to a clinic to have a bronchial dilator put on him. … He had pneumonia and was given an injection of antibiotics. He's still a little bit ill, not completely free of his pneumonia, but he's much better than he was when we found him."

At home with Lourdes and Rocco

Madonna and Guy now have David with them at their home in London, along with their two other children, Lourdes and Rocco. Madonna said the children are in complete love with their new baby brother.

"They just embraced him, and that's the amazing thing about children," she says. "They don't ask questions. They've never once said, 'What is he doing here', or mentioned the difference in his skin color, or questioned his presence in our life. That is an amazing lesson that children do teach us."

Madonna addresses David's biological father's recent comments.

When Madonna first arrived in Malawi, she says she didn't know anything about David's parents. She was soon told that his mother had died of HIV and that his three siblings had also died of HIV. At the time, the Minister of Children and Mothers Welfare told Madonna that even though David's biological father's whereabouts were unknown, they would have to find him to give consent for the adoption.

"Here's what I knew. David had been living in this orphanage since he was two weeks old," Madonna says. "He had survived malaria and tuberculosis, and no one from his extended family had visited him since the time he arrived. So from my perspective, there was no one looking after David's welfare."

Once David's father was located, he initially said he gave his son up for adoption always hoping that someone like Madonna would be able to give him a better life, and agreed to the adoption. Now, according to the press, David's father is saying he did not fully understand what he was doing when he agreed to let Madonna adopt his son.

"I do not believe that is true. I sat in that room, I looked into that man's eyes," Madonna says. "I believe that the press is manipulating this information out of him. I believe at this point in time, he's been terrorized by the media. They have asked him things, repeatedly, and they have put words in his mouth. They have spun a story that is completely false."

Media influence on international adoption

With all the speculation, rumors and overall controversy surrounding Madonna's adoption of David, how does Madonna feel about the media?

"I wouldn't say I'm hurt by it, but I would say I'm disappointed," she says. "I understand that gossip and telling negative stories sells newspapers. But I think for me, I'm disappointed because it discourages other people from doing the same thing—for anybody who had the idea that they, too, would like to open their home and give a life to a child living in an orphanage who might possibly not live past the age of 5. Anybody who had that idea would be discouraged from doing it. For me, that's what disappoints me the most. I feel like the media is doing a great disservice to all the orphans of Africa, period, not just Malawi, by turning it into such a negative thing.

"I beg all of those people to go to Africa and see what I saw and walk through those villages. … To see 8-year-olds in charge of households. To see mothers dying, with Kaposi sarcoma lesions all over their bodies. To see open sewages everywhere. To see what I saw. It is a state of emergency. As far as I'm concerned, the adoption laws have to be changed to suit that state of emergency. I think if everybody went there, they'd want to bring one of those children home with them and give them a better life."

Source.




Edit: DAVID!
HEEERRREEEE He is!


With new dad, Guy Ritchie


Page 1 of 6
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] >>
[info]pikapika217 25th-Oct-2006 01:51 pm (UTC)
umm...wasn't Madonna supposed to live in africa with the baby for two years before she could leave with him? (I remember something like that being said) if so, yeah. she definitely got special treatment.
[info]zanzou_chan 25th-Oct-2006 02:19 pm (UTC)
It says the baby has to live with HER for a year and a half, not her live in Africa. It'd be insane to ask her to live in Africa for two years. o_O
[info]jazzypom but for other people25th-Oct-2006 05:59 pm (UTC)
they have to live in Malawi for that amount of time. This is why people are saying that Madonna kinda bought her way out of this so to speak, because she hasn't begun the adoption process in the UK where she's a resident. It's all a mess.
[info]lyriaz 25th-Oct-2006 06:09 pm (UTC)
IF that is true, and I don't really think it is, then this boy would never have been adopted and could very likely have died.
[info]trustnoone86 25th-Oct-2006 01:52 pm (UTC)
Madonna is adopting that grown man?
[info]poison_ivy_1 25th-Oct-2006 01:52 pm (UTC)
why is she doing the interview via satellite?
[info]day_afterday 25th-Oct-2006 02:00 pm (UTC)
Because she has a little baby there in London? if she went there, you would call her a bad mom leaving her son behind
[info]poison_ivy_1 25th-Oct-2006 02:02 pm (UTC)
never been a big madonna fan but i couldnt say she was a bad mom. she seems to be devoted to the her other kids. but i'm sure the media would go crazy over it if she was there live.
[info]littlelauren86 25th-Oct-2006 02:50 pm (UTC)
iawtc. You can't win with some people.
[info]lovenoelg 25th-Oct-2006 01:52 pm (UTC)
I love how Madge says that she doesn't watch TV or read the papers to look all cool and above the fray. Every now and then she will slip-up and talk about shows she has watched.

Like, she said she loves Will and Grace and talked about a segment of Good Morning America. I mean, seriously, lady.

I'm over this adoption story, like whoa.
[info]sulking 25th-Oct-2006 02:17 pm (UTC)
i've only heard her say she doesn't let her kids watch tv. did she ever say she didn't do it herself? that's weird considering TV publicity is her life blood nowadays.
[info]lovenoelg 25th-Oct-2006 02:25 pm (UTC)
Read the article.
[info]chanelshowgirl 25th-Oct-2006 03:37 pm (UTC)
LOL She's so full of it. I remember when her daughter was born, she was shocked when someone asked if she'd be allowed to watch TV. Her reply was like "I will NEVER allow my children to watch TV or use the Internet! They're both terrible for children or adults of any age." Um, HELLO, TV and Internet is what made your career, and then your comeback!

She's an idiot.
[info]dita1974 25th-Oct-2006 07:25 pm (UTC)
She watches those shows on DVD. She buys them and watches them. She doesn't watch TV. She purchases DVD's of shows she hears about that sound good to her...she does the same with children shows for her kids. Since you seem to know so much about her, you should know that.
[info]fisher55 25th-Oct-2006 07:56 pm (UTC)
she was also a ginormous fan of regis and kathie lee back in the day
[info]lauranat ould25th-Oct-2006 01:53 pm (UTC)
It seems to me that the thing people are most annoyed about is not the adoption itself, but the fact that she could have easily just sponsored David and allowed him to live happily and healthily with his family.

y/n?
[info]not_kosher Re: ould25th-Oct-2006 01:56 pm (UTC)
N
[info]lovenoelg Re: ould25th-Oct-2006 01:57 pm (UTC)
I don't understand that. Rich people shouldn't adopt, they should just give people their money?
[info]lauranat Re: ould25th-Oct-2006 01:58 pm (UTC)
Well, quite, but that seems to be the gist of the fury I've seen about it here.
[info]where_i_begin Re: ould25th-Oct-2006 02:25 pm (UTC)
It's funny to me that there seem to be "rules" about what celebs can and can't do when it comes to charity. Like if they donate some money and not their whole entire life savings, it's "not enough." And it's people who do absolutely nothing to help others that say this.
[info]ninjarina Re: ould25th-Oct-2006 06:14 pm (UTC)
Yes but money gets mismanaged. It's like when the UN delivers food to starving people in Africa only to have the envoys be seized by the local militia.
[info]squishy_candy Re: ould25th-Oct-2006 01:59 pm (UTC)
his family never even came to see him. the only one alive is his dad and he is the one who put him in the orphanage.
[info]zanzou_chan Re: ould25th-Oct-2006 02:21 pm (UTC)
No. Sponsering someone isn't a sign that they would be able to live their life or support the child-- the fact that he didn't visit the kid while he was in an orphanage is a baaaaaaad sign.
[info]mixedukjew People believe what they want to believe25th-Oct-2006 02:38 pm (UTC)
The father had already given up the child to an orphanage when David was two weeks old. Ergo, David was already an 'orphan' by the time Madonna arrived. Once a parent gives up parental responsibility for a child it becomes difficult for them to expect to make decisions on that child's future. The fact that the Ritchie's wanted the father's blessing months ago before they sought to put adoption procedures into effect shows that they cared what David's blood family thought about it, and at the time, the family gave their blessing. I suspect that in the last couple of weeks, the tabloid gutter press have since been over to Malawi (a place they don't give a shit about) to stir things up and create more sensational storylines.

The other thing to remember is that there are a million 'orphans' in Malawi some of whom have living family members, some of whom don't, but what they are all at risk of is potentially fatal diseases like Malaria and HIV/AIDS, that kill many people there every year. Taking a child who had already been given up out of those circumstances, setting up an orphanage, donating money to causes within Malawi to help combat the many problems the country has is not a bad thing.

And I have to reiterate, many of the naysayers don't care about Malawi or the plight of it's people, they only care about bashing Madonna.
[info]fountain_of_joy 25th-Oct-2006 01:54 pm (UTC)
why is everyone giving her shit? we should APPLAUD a rich family who adopts a needy baby!
[info]not_kosher 25th-Oct-2006 01:56 pm (UTC)
i actually believe madonna

wow

i cant believe i just said that

thats like me saying "oh mariah carey, nah i could never get into her"
[info]logansrogue 25th-Oct-2006 03:20 pm (UTC)
I'll take note. It's a key moment.
[info]squishy_candy 25th-Oct-2006 01:58 pm (UTC)
sounds like what happened to my husband. he was in the hospital in a body cast when he was 3 months old and no one from his family came to see him at all so he was taken in by a minister and his wife. they raised him for 5 years and when they tried to adopt him is when all these human rights people got involved and took him away from them. if they had been allowed to keep him, he never would have been abused and homeless and living on the streets when he was 10. those lawyers and other groups were not thinking about his welfare, they just didnt want a white couple raising an indian kid. ok im done venting, i think the media should just stay out of this.
[info]where_i_begin 25th-Oct-2006 02:12 pm (UTC)
That sounds like an amazing story. Has your husband ever written it down?
[info]squishy_candy 25th-Oct-2006 02:16 pm (UTC)
he had been thinking about it, but there is a lot of bad things that he would rather not bring back up because he is trying to move past it all. so he has been putting it off.
[info]chanelshowgirl 25th-Oct-2006 03:39 pm (UTC)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! about your husband! WTF, why on earth did they take him away from them? That is such bull shit. These people constantly forget about the psychological impact that occurs when you do something like that to a kid. All they care about is paperwork. Disgusting.
[info]stiletto_s 25th-Oct-2006 06:28 pm (UTC)
And he remembered all of this from the age of 5? Did this minister and his wife ever try to contact him again? Did he ever find a good home?

Soryr for all the q's, but this story is seriously upsetting :( I want to hear a happy ending.
[info]dogeatgod 25th-Oct-2006 08:11 pm (UTC)
That is pretty much the saddest thing I've ever heard. :(
[info]joanshearer Thank you for sharing25th-Oct-2006 08:50 pm (UTC)
I'm very moved by this story because it's alot more common that people seem to know or care to admit. Your hubby's story is a good example of the flip side of so called "reunifaction" and should be considered in the welfare of kids in foster care/adoption situations.

Sometimes people have good intentions, but they need to think of the whole pic before interfering. Hopefully David will not have to experience what happened to your hubby.
[info]anterrabre 25th-Oct-2006 11:27 pm (UTC)
That made me cry. WTF??? That's...fucking horrible. Hope hubby is ok now. :(
[info]poison_ivy_1 25th-Oct-2006 02:00 pm (UTC)
she could've adopted a little poor black orphan from detroit (her hometown...y/n?). they need homes too.
[info]lovenoelg 25th-Oct-2006 02:06 pm (UTC)
Honestly, why does it matter where she got the kid from? She somehow owes the orphans of her hometown?

Pick, pick, pick.
[info]sulking 25th-Oct-2006 02:20 pm (UTC)
no, it's just that since angelina jolie started picking out foreign children (which seem a bit more like accessories to me), it's become the "cool" thing to do, when adopting american kids is just as valid and important. there are kids who live through shit here too, and the idea shouldn't be put in people's heads that african children are the ONLY ones suffering.
[info]poison_ivy_1 25th-Oct-2006 02:25 pm (UTC)
i used detroit just as an example. but why is everyone so quick to run out of the country to adopt kids. i guess i just dont understand why just because kids here may not be in the same conditions as african orphans, it doesnt mean they dont deserve the attention. the child welfare system in america is pretty sh*tty despite what people may think. but whatevs.

oh and she is from detroit? cause i've heard she isnt. just wondering.
[info]where_i_begin 25th-Oct-2006 02:20 pm (UTC)
Kids from everywhere need homes. Why does she need to be loyal to her hometown? At least the U.S. has standards, infrastructure and better medical care...in places like Africa, it's often a life-or-death situation.
[info]mixedukjew So could many other Americans25th-Oct-2006 02:44 pm (UTC)
Yours is the richest country on earth after all. Unlike children in Africa, life expectancy in the US is much higher and infant mortality rates are much lower. Ask yourself why more Americans don't foster and adopt. Would you if you could afford to? I know I would.

And incase you'd forgotten, Madonna lives in London so that would be a huge barrier to her adopting an American child (regardless of colour). And yes, there are plenty of people who could adopt here in the UK too. The laws on fostering and adopting in the US and the UK are very stringent and Madonna would probably have been refused over here for being too old DESPITE many children needing homes.
And why the hell should it matter where in the world a child is? Shouldn't the first priority be to find them a loving home?
[info]stefsoleil 25th-Oct-2006 05:02 pm (UTC)
She's considered too old for adoption in the States. That's the reason why most non-famous people consider foreign adoption in the first place, not some kind of trend.
[info]day_afterday 25th-Oct-2006 02:01 pm (UTC)
She said it. I fully support her.
[info]tanya1976 25th-Oct-2006 02:02 pm (UTC)
She's giving a child an opportunity for a full life. STFU and find an actual filmsy issue to push.

A portion of the media keeps digging itself into a hole for bullshit, instead of using itself for something meaningful as a whole.
[info]lauranat 25th-Oct-2006 02:03 pm (UTC)
iawtc so, so much.
[info]bubs 25th-Oct-2006 02:11 pm (UTC)
Well, that's what I though until this last round in the madonna media fest.
[info]tanya1976 25th-Oct-2006 02:27 pm (UTC)
I think the father's being manipulated by the media big time. It seems as if the media wants some big scandal and they are trying every means of doing so.
[info]where_i_begin 25th-Oct-2006 02:14 pm (UTC)
Seriously. Putting such a negative spin on an amazing gesture like this is so pointless and ridiculous.
[info]sulking 25th-Oct-2006 02:24 pm (UTC)
well, i don't know that MADONNA will give him a better life than he would've had in his home surrounded by whatever friends/family he had left (considering she could have just paid for his treatments and for food and schooling or whatever), but i guess having food in your stomach and a weirdo for a mother is better than..no food in your stomach, or something like that.
[info]poison_ivy_1 25th-Oct-2006 02:04 pm (UTC)
just wait until britney follows in her idol's footsteps and adopts an africna orphan too.
[info]sulking 25th-Oct-2006 02:21 pm (UTC)
haha seriously.
[info]notpiecebypiece 25th-Oct-2006 02:05 pm (UTC)
who cares if the adoption process was sped up because she was rich? a little boy now has a family who is going to take care of him. I understand that people trying to adopt, with less money, might be frustrated because they are finding it so hard, but... come on. when you're rich, a lot of shit is easier. it's kind of the way it goes.
[info]shesdoneitnow 25th-Oct-2006 02:58 pm (UTC)
I know!!! Jesus people are acting like shes a celeb weasling her way out of jailtime for a DUI or some shit. She's saving a life! Let that bitch be, DAMN! Its not like shes bringing him into a crackden, shes going to give him a much better life, God bless her for it.
[info]henisgaggot 25th-Oct-2006 03:02 pm (UTC)
for real.
[info]chanelshowgirl 25th-Oct-2006 03:40 pm (UTC)
True.
[info]bubs 25th-Oct-2006 02:10 pm (UTC)
WTF is she doing yapping to Oprah about it?
[info]turi 25th-Oct-2006 02:15 pm (UTC)
that's the whole point of oprah, ya hello?
[info]bubs 25th-Oct-2006 03:19 pm (UTC)
Whahaha yes I know that much. Never mind honey.
[info]noye 25th-Oct-2006 02:10 pm (UTC)
So what if she used her money and celebrity to save a child's life. Hell if I had the resources you better believe I would do the same!!!
[info]pastry_pig 25th-Oct-2006 03:17 pm (UTC)
Christ, I agree. She gave an unwanted human a home, that's what is really important here. I think the air must be thin on some people's high horses.
Page 1 of 6
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] >>
This page was loaded Jun 1st 2012, 9:30 pm GMT.