Hmmm she has a new childrens book coming out in the next couple of weeks....how convienent.

lazycrockett said:

yep...she's really smart!

Sdldawn said:

You know... (not that it should matter)I really like you and always have, so please give me room to misbehave, act out now and ask:

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOUUUUU? That baby was given to an orphanage at birth because his surviving relatives cannot take care of him. Peole need to fucking go to the poorest countries in Africa so they can see how the infrastructure works, how everything is not as black and white as we in the west deem it to be with our armchair solutions all the time! What the hell do any of us even know about Africa??? Or how their systems work socially or politically to even be passing judgment on why it would be acceptable or necessary for a struggling parent to consider adoption??? We bitch and moan ALLLL the time about welfare mothers who should have posssibly thought of adoption as an alternative way to ensure their child's future in the United States of America---A FIRST WORLD COUNTRY... but in we're looking at one of the poorest nations in the world...which SOMETIMES gets food and SOMETIMES does, depending on the prevailing attitudes of western political climate (HELLO), and collectively we can't even send them fucking water tablets to purify the water holes they dig in the ground to drink and bathe...personal citizens can only do so much on a community scale before they run into red tape...and we... we the people...most of us who have never even been to war torn or diseased ravaged nations...LET ALONE even pull 5 or 10 bucks out of our pockets each month to HELP such nations get something as simple as water purification pills for small villages, or volunteer as teachers or medical aids to care for future generations in the poorest yet largest nations in the world...we are criticizing a person who is active in the fight against dying humanity. To hell with it, I'll go on record as saying I could give two poo-poos about Madonna as a celebrity---but she is, whether we like it or not, whether we want to accept it or not, whether some of us are envious of her position or not, is OUT THERE, putting her money where her mouth is ( because we all know she's been on her soapbox preaching for about 10 years now where global conflict issues are concerned). She, like Pitt, and Kidman, and Farrow, and Josephine Baker before them as well as countless other women...is doing what WE ALL ARE NOT. She is taking the flights, she is discovering, investigating, she is digging her heels in the DIRT. LEARNING . DOING. PASSING HER GIFTS ON AS BEST AS SHE KNOWS HOW. AND THE REST OF US....???

Papachulo...please allow me to say that the above rant actually was not personally directed, rather than, me being frustrated at a collective ignorance and misunderstanding of how things are outside of our own U.S.A. We are quick to judge monumental global issues in which we have little familiarity or back story. then on top of it, other than impractical armchair solutions, we can't even practice what we preach and say, for example, give money to poor Malawi villages OURSELVES in 2006 when their plight has been on the international news for YEARS...it is very frustrating for me to listen to some of the small statements people are juxtaposing to such a LARGE idea...

And if I have offended I hope you can excuse

...but I had to get that off of my chest HOWEVER it came out



...

I agree 100% Ottensen with everything you said.
I also think Madonna's adoption just seems sudden. She has probably been working on adopting a child for awhile behind the scenes and just kept it quiet until she actually found the child. Not that I believe everything that I read in the tabloids, but they have been lots of stories about her looking into adopting a child.

Plus shes got something to hold over the kids head for the rest of his life.

"If it wasnt for me youd still....", "Yes Mommie Dearest."

Editorial
Why vilify Madonna's generosity?

From Carol Sarler at The Observer

For a few short years after the fall of Ceausescu,flights from Bucharest were packed with the pale,beaming,joyful anxiety of what some called 'the desperate childless',nervously holding,for the first time,a baby in their arms.One woman,however,stood out; she carried her newly adopted two-year old with the confidence of experience.As well she might: she had a three-year old of her own at home and two other children slightly older.

She had wanted,she told me,to help.But she'd be lousy at politics or campaigning or fund-raising;indeed,she realized,the only thing she was really good at was raising children.So one little boy was how she helped.

That boy,now a teenager in the comfort of the shires,has no idea what he escaped; those of us who saw his orphanage have.I thought then,and still do,that this woman's reasoning and generosity were magnificent.Such a pity that nobody seems prepared to cut Madonna the same slack.

No sooner did we learn of her plans to adopt an African child than the bitching began-just as it did when fellow adopters Mia Farrow,Angelina Jolie and Meg Ryan before her.Even Jon Snow,who should know better,inquired whether this is a 'fashion',as if the labour involved in nurturing babies is akin to that of carrying a new handbag,and the consensus,from right and left,is that there is something sinister in Madonna's decision.

The willies from the right,as vigorous now as when Virginia Bottomley helped to staunch the flow of Romanian orphans in the mid-1990s,appear to stem from a suspicion that this is just another route for foreigners to 'flood' into the country and be a 'drain' on resources;too monstrous to address,save perhaps to point out that the kind of parents who pursue these adoptions are precisely the kind of parents who will produce the most effacious taxpayers of the future.

The liberal left is at least as shocking.Pundit after pundit drones on about the perils of 'snatching' children from their 'culture'.To that I say,go and stand in the poorest orphanages of the world's most dispossessed;look,sniff,smell and don't--don't you dare tell me that,in such a context,the word 'culture' is other than an obscenity.Any identity problems the child might develop are slight compared to the certain problems that would otherwise have been their lot.

Yeah,but,no,but,continue the pundits: the money would be better spent in donations to the child's place of birth.To that I say,whoever suggested this is an either/or.In fact,Madonna--like many inter-country adopters--has also donated lavishly to baby David's community.Yet she knows,as we all know,that sometimes no amount of financial support will persuade a local family to rescue a child from an orphanage (think,for instance,of baby girls in China);furthermore,by the time the money has filtered down,it might help another David,another decade.But not this one.

I hold no particular brief for Madonna,her music or her faith.As a mother,however,based on what we know,she is diligent,hot on proper food and the banning of,say,improper TV and I have no reason to suppose that her motives for this adoption are different from my friend's on the plane from Bucharest.The only difference is that Madonna's fame,as with that of Misses Farrow,Jolie and Ryan,has made her an easy target for the snipers,even though it is also the means by which she can afford to do it in the first place and--precisely because the cameras will continue to monitor her and her family--the means through which she might even be able to keep the scandal of the needs of Africa in the public eye.

Exactly so,say the still-grumbling pundits: there are millions and millions in need;this is just useless,gesture-politics,drop-in-ocean stuff.But what they really mean is that if you can't save a million,there's no point in saving one.And to that,I have nothing to say at all.

ThreadBare said:

But how can you prove that this a "novelty adoption"? You clearly think Madonna is doing this for attention,but how can you be 100% sure of her motives? Adopting and caring for a child is a big responsibilty,a life-changing event.This isn't like a new persona that she's gonna toss aside in a few years.This child is hers,he's a part of her and her family now.I think her motives are sincere.Until proven otherwise,let's just give her the benefit of the doubt,okay?

Good for her.

Rhondab said:

No,I don't think alot of moeny is all that matters.Based on what we know,Madonna seems to be a good,dedicated parent.

Sdldawn said:

Uhh,you do realize that this child was put into an orphanage because his father can't take care of him? I don't think you have no idea what real poverty is.Go to Malawi,Africa and check out the living conditions there.

SoulAlive said:

I agree. I think it could be better argued that this is a novelty adoption, if Madonna didn't already have children of her own. But I think since she already has kids who is a great mom to proves that she is aware of the resonsibility and life changing consequences of having a child. She hasn't tossed her own children aside in a few years, has she?

Glindathegood said:

exactly.

Ottensen said:

Beautiful !!!!!

banks said:

Well....

I tell ya what: how do you know what we all are not doing??

That's the only complaint I have with your comments. I'm sure some if not most of us are doing OUR part-- or what we can even though we are not MULTIMILLIONAIRE CELEBRITIES having our every "good deed" documented.

I say more power to Madonna. But then again, I say more power to ANYONE who is trying to make a difference in ANY way he/she can, working toward making this world a better place through donations of time, money, effort, or even just common courtesy, respect, and tolerance.


Oh... and BTW. There are some pretty serious problems as far as poverty here in the US, too.

I guess I just take offense to the generalization that WE AREN'T DOING OUR PART because MADONNA et al receives publicity for their actions, but WE DON'T, so therefore we OBVIOUSLY aren't doing anything--like we OBVIOUSLY don't KNOW anything either. That's quite annoying and unfair.
[Edited 10/16/06 7:35am]

Zahara needed a playdate.

Isel said:

Point taken. And actually, we really are on the same page but my statements may not have come out as I intended. My disappointment is with those who would assert that she is in bad form for wanting to adopt an African child, and not doing anything to help people in her own homeland. For me the point is that we don't know that she's not contributing to US causes, in the same way that people don't know what most of us are doing to help out in our own way in our communities and the world at large. Now I will admit, I was to some degree stirring the pot with my "we all.." statement, but please know that I did not mean to refer to the folks that actually do their bit to pitch in an lend a helping hand to their fellow man (woman child animal tree and whathaveyou). Nor did I mean to imply that because Madonna's a celebrity we should be fawning over her efforts or paying heed to her more than our fellow non celeb citizens. I was referring to those who DO NOT do anything to help those in need or distress , yet have the unmitigated gall to criticize others who step up to the plate to do whatever they can to contribute...those jokers I wish would go sit down somewhere and catch BRICK or be quiet if they're not interested in being/doing something progressive and productive to help out.

So don't you be annoyed with me, snookums! Sit and meditate on it a sec and you'll understand that I wasn't referring to you or the good peeps who are out there doing their thing . It's just that blockhead portion of the bunch, the derailers, the witchhunters...you know the ones-the non or ill-informed that sit scratching their balls all day with no aims other than waiting for stuff to jump off so they have something new to criticize when all they essentially do is take up space... deep down inside they know who they are and they rouse me to no end with all their decrying on others deeds, yet wouldn't take 30 extra seconds out their day to help a feeble old woman cross a street.... those are the ones that get me RANTING ...

...and then I start writing in that stream of consciousness, non-spell-grammar-checked fashion that may not be entirely clear and occaisionally has repurcussions

Well guys, I actually forgot to mention in all my blabbering, it looks like there were some developements in this story on this side of the pond at about 12 noon central EU time.According to CNN (the Hong Kong/London desks) There are some childrens advocacy groups that have stepped up to get an injunction to keep Madonna from adopting this child, and there was even an attempt to keep her and the baby from boarding the plane. Now the interviews that I saw were very interesting, in that the argument of the children's rights reps were, today it starts as a celebrity with pure intentions wanting to take a child out of the country with special permission. But tomorrow, that could lead to human traffickers coming in to swipe children for ill, ill things...

Being in the EU and so close to Africa trafficking is a (ab)"normal" fact of life here. I can see this is developing into a really complicated exploration and discussion of some deep rooted issues we have in the world....

...will try to post appropriate CNN link but can'tpromise to find it immediately...!

Ottensen said:

Okie Dokie my little cherub...


BUT I still stand by my comments even though I appreciate your clarification and advice.

Now let's meditate on this:

Most people just do the best they can. Some people are just barely supporting their own families.. or even themselves, so it's very difficult to pass judgment on anyone efforts or contributions or lack there of. And WEALTH will sure buy a lot of things. Regardless of any humanitarian efforts I might offer, I wonder if I would be able to just fly to Malawi on an a commercial airline and adopt a baby --- JUST LIKE THAT. (Madonna has her own private plane, apparently, but I would have to fly commercial and sit in economy class.) I'm not doubting Madonna's good-intentions and good heart. But I don't think the rest of us would ever even have that opportunity. Yeah... money, power, and celebrity go a long way.

SoulAlive said:

yeah...but you said that if Jessica and Paris' dumb asses adopted the kids would still be better off implying that all it takes is $$$ to parent a happy, healthy child.


I still say this isn't about "madonna" but even the "trend" of non celebrities to go to russia, china, etc to adopt when there are so many children here in the US who will spend all of there lives in foster care.

Also I think Madonna has to be blamed for ppl accusing her for doing this for publicity. This is her rep so

I think she's a good mother and takes motherhood seriously but I do understand the outcry.


@snookums and cherub

Madge's boy gets flown out of Africa



NEWS WIRE REPORTS

LILONGWE, Malawi - A private jet whisked the African tot that Madonna wants to adopt over the borderline yesterday, fueling complaints that the Material Girl used her wealth and celebrity to flout Malawi's laws.
David Banda, along with a nanny and bodyguards, was flown to South Africa, where the group boarded a regular flight for London. The 1-year-old was expected to be reunited within a few days with Madonna and her filmmaker husband, Guy Ritchie, the singer's spokeswoman said.

"She's going to do her best to not make it a public circus," publicist Liz Rosenberg said. "It's not my sense that she would want to expose the whole thing to public scrutiny."

The couple's plans to adopt the boy have angered human rights activists who claim Madonna is using her clout to get around Malawi's laws, which bar nonresidents from adopting.

"Madonna is not a resident of Malawi and therefore does not qualify to apply to adopt until meeting the residency requirement," said Justin Dzonzi, chairman of Human Rights Consultative Committee. He said the group might seek a court injunction to block the adoption.

Rosenberg said a Malawian court last week approved an interim adoption and that Madonna, 48, and Ritchie, 38, had all the proper documents to take David from Malawi.

"This interim adoption grants David's new parents temporary custody for 18 months, during which time they will be evaluated by the courts of Malawi per the tribal customs of the country," Rosenberg said.

David's biological mother died about a month after giving birth to him. His father, Yohame Banda, has said he can't afford to raise David and believes Madonna and her husband will give him a better life.

In addition to new parents, David will gain a new brother and sister. Madonna and Ritchie have a 5-year-old son, Rocco, and Madonna has a 9-year-old daughter, Lourdes, from a previous relationship.

Originally published on October 17, 2006

Rhondab said:

I'm saying that these children are better off living with a rich celebrity instead of living in a poor,under-developed country in which many people,including the parents of these kids,are infected with the AIDs virus.Would Jessica Simpson make a good parent? Who knows? But just look at the alternative.

"there are many children here in the US who will spend all of their lives in foster care"

No doubt,and I'm sure if Madonna could help out all of these kids too,if she would do it.But let's be real: a poor child in an American orphanage has it alot better than a poor child in Malawai,Africa.In America,a person can always find something to eat.The poverty and starvation in Africa is totally different,but I don't think I need to tell you that.


.
[Edited 10/17/06 5:54am]

SoulAlive said:

of course you don't need to tell me that BUT at the same time, its like saying my hurt is more than your hurt. its all still hurting. Personally, I'd rather NOT see a child in need in the care of a Paris Hilton simply because she has money. That's just me. I think a child that has money and is neglected is just as bad as a child living in poverty. The assumption is that the child living in poverty isn't being loved and nurtured when the parents are present.

So....Americans pass on caring for American children in need because the orphanges are better. I guess that makes sense.

But once again, my issue isn't with celebrities necessarily but why skip the foster home down the street to go to another country for a child. And let me say that I've even thought about adoption from Africa BUT also becoming a foster mom. Too many american black children are left in foster care.

Rhondab said:

before a child needs loving care, it needs food and shelter. that's basic of all life. it's better off being unloved at the age of 20 than starving to death at the age of 6.

On the other hand...

I just wanted to throw this out for consideration:

One of my best friends is adopted. Her parents took her, not after serious deliberation, but on a whim. And since they had a bit more money than the average suburban couple and knew where to spread it, they were able to bypass the red tape and paperwork that typically comes with adoption.

Though she was definitely a spur of the moment addition to the family, hers are some of the best parents I know. A little strict, but good.

Madonna has defended her decision to adopt a baby boy from Malawi. Here is the open letter she has released about one-year-old David Banda...

My husband and I began the adoption process many months prior to our trip to Malawi.

I did not wish to disclose my intentions to the world prior to the adoption happening as this is a private family matter.

After learning that there were over one million orphans in Malawi, it was my wish to open up our home and help one child escape an extreme life of hardship, poverty and in many cases death, as well as expand our family.

Nevertheless, we have gone about the adoption procedure according to the law like anyone else who adopts a child. Reports to the contrary are totally inaccurate.

The procedure includes an 18-month evaluation period after which time we hope to make this adoption permanent.

This was not a decision or commitment that my family or I take lightly.

I am overwhelmed and inspired by my trip to Malawi and hope that it helps bring attention to how much more the world needs to do to help the children of Africa.

My heartfelt thanks for all the good wishes I have received and I hope the press will allow my family some room for us to experience the joy we feel to have David home.

Madonna Ritchie
October 17, 2006
London, England

Madonna: How dare she!

MADONNA'S Malawian baby David Banda has spent the first year of his life living in one of the world's poorest countries. He will now live in one of the richest.

For the past 12 months he's been living in a dilapidated orphanage with 100 other babies where food and clothing are in short supply.

He is now settling into a luxurious English home where he will want for nothing.

His dead mother and two brothers can never be replaced but he is now being welcomed into a new family, with a mother, father, brother and sister.

He will be educated, have access to the best medical care and can expect to live a lot longer than he would have had he stayed in Malawi, where the life expectancy is 37.

Makes you weep doesn't it?

According to some, it should. Well, sorry, but I'm not even welling up.

Poor David has been adopted by Madonna and that apparently is a fate that some seem to think is worse than death.

While I agree that the process in which the Material Girl has gone about the adoption has been questionable - and a tad on the tacky side - I'm really struggling to see why she's being crucified.

Pass me a hammer and nails if she and husband Guy Ritchie make Swept Away 2 but here they actually appear to be trying to do something good.

They've taken a child from a miserable, wretched existence and offered him a life full of hope and promise.

The mongrels!

It's been argued that instead of taking David from his home and buying him a $12,300 rocking horse, Madonna should have pumped her cash into his village to help the entire community and let them get on with it.

She has reportedly kicked the can to the tune of $5 million to put into programs supporting the country's orphans.

She's also committed another $1.5 million to making a documentary about the African nation's plight.

$6.5 million is hardly an inconsiderable sum - and you would expect that there is more where that came from.

Her involvement has got people around the world talking about Malawi, where there are more than one million orphans and the average income is less than $1 a day.

In the past 12 months the impoverished nation has barely rated a mention in the media, other than their decent showing in the netball at the Commonwealth Games.

Sure, Madonna could afford to chip in even more without affecting her wardrobe budget - particularly now that seems to consist of just tracksuits. But how can you put a price tag on David's potential anyway?

The last thing I want to do is suggest Madonna is some sort of saint but it is just possible that she is investing in and helping to create what could become that village's greatest and most influential asset - David himself.

Assuming that Madonna and her family live up to their promise to ensure David is aware of his roots - and let's face it, she's hardly going to be able to keep it from him - his ongoing connection to Malawi will keep the focus on his country's plight.

And who knows what he might do as a young man.

Maybe he'll prance around London's nightclubs like a git but maybe he'll dedicate his life to improving the lives of those condemned by virtue of their birthplace to a life most of us could not begin to imagine.

One of the things that seems to irk people is that David has a father who is alive and relatively well, which should have ruled him out of being considered for adoption if you accept some of the hysterical reaction.

But there is nothing unusual about adopting a child whose parents are alive.

Like most children in Australia, David was put up for adoption by his biological family because they believed they couldn't raise him and another family could do a better job.

It must be galling to anyone who has waited months and years to adopt a child to see Madonna jump the queue and circumvent the rules thanks to her celebrity status and enormous bank balance.

But it has been legally sanctioned - not only by Malawi's courts but also by the boy's father, Yohane.

Armed with an interim order from the courts, Madonna whisked David out of the country before a number of human rights organisations prepared to seek an injunction stopping her.

Those organisations who have been thwarted are furious but David's father is reportedly "ecstatic'' that his son is on his way to a better life.

"I appealed to the self-styled lovers of David to leave my baby alone,'' he said.

"Where were they when David didn't have milk when his mother died? Do they want him to go back to the orphanage?''

Well Yohane, it would appear the short answer is yes.

Over the next 18 months, Madonna and Ritchie's suitability as parents will be evaluated by the courts of Malawi.

Those organisations would do better helping David settle in to his new life and assisting Madonna ensure he never forgets his heritage rather than perpetuating a tug-of-war over a little boy just to prove a point.

Source: Naomi Toy, The Daily Telegraph (Australia)

ehuffnsd said:

AMEN!

I hope the nannies get a raise!!

I think people are more upset with the way Madonna went about it more so than whether or not she should adopt the child in the first place.

As I said earlier, it's more about celebrities--not even celebrities--but MONEY being able to "buy" ---whatever. Then some celebrities, in particular, gripe about being the negative aspects public figures,but the very fact that they ARE public figures opens-up tons of opportunities to them that none of the rest of us will ever have. So... I dunno. I think that's where a lot of the resentment is coming from. I really think it's more resentment---maybe even jealousy??

Also the fact that was a media event--with pics of her dancing, etc. I thought that was a little strange. Was that documentation for her fansite or for some other project? Or did the press just follow her down there?

I don't really keep up with Madonna, so I have no idea.

Sure a lot of good came from the situation. But there is just something about it that grates, not Madonna, per se.

Rhondab said:

Hey,maybe in the future,Madonna will adopt an American baby.She has a big heart and I'm sure she would love to help out every poor kid in the world.But let's applaud her for what she's doing now! She's doing her part to make a difference.She has already given $6.5 million of her own money to Africa.Because she is a huge international celebrity/icon,she is able to focus attention on the plight of these children.That's a good thing.I don't see the platinum-selling rappers going over there,doing this.They're more concerned with their bling bling,and degrading women in their videos