In recent years, the number of overseas adoptions by Americans has skyrocketed. These types of adoptions have been thrown into the spotlight as stars such as Angelina Jolie and Madonna adopt babies from other nations. Madonna's adoption experience has been very controversial. She is in the process of adopting a baby boy named David from Malawi. Malawian human rights groups say that the details of the adoption were not explained comprehensively to David's father. David's father had previously had two of his children die of malaria, and his wife died from complications giving birth to David. He had placed David in an orphanage a year ago. Last week, Madonna signed the papers that would give her the right to temporary custody of the child. She must undergo thorough screening in her home by social workers just as any other adopting parent must.
This controversy has raised many questions. Should celebrities be allowed to adopt overseas? If so, should they be given special treatment because of their fame? Many people believe that celebrities have a certain "edge" over 'average' people. It is true that they get special treatment and privileges - free clothing and great dinner reservations, etc. But do Hollywood celebrities have an edge over 'normal' people when it comes to adopting?
As far as the public knows, Madonna did not get special treatment when adopting David. And again, she must wait and be observed by social workers for over a year before she can think about permanent adoption. Right now, she is considered a foster parent. If an average person was trying to adopt an overseas baby, surely such conflict would not arise. The person would most likely even be praised for providing a better life for the child.
Just as celebrities shouldn't be given special treatment during adoptions based on fame, should they be stopped from doing things like adopting from other countries because they are indeed famous? In reality, celebrities are just normal people with high-profile jobs, much wealth, and opportunities that most people do not have. Stable people who have proven to be good parents in the past, such as Madonna, should be allowed to adopt if other people are allowed to do the same.
If a person has the resources, will and love to provide a good home for a child who otherwise wouldn't have a shot, they should be given the chance to do so. Adopting from impoverished countries provides so many great opportunities for the children that are adopted. They are given a chance that they wouldn't have had. Once baby David is adopted, he will be able to have a great education, a privileged childhood, and can be whatever he chooses to be as an adult. He'll never have to go through the hardship his birth father endured. Instead of raising controversy, people who adopt overseas should be commended for providing a wonderful, previously unheard-of life for the children.




I agree with you. BUT, I also have an issue with Madonna's adoption being headline news. There are bigger issues in the world then issues with an adoption, something that happens every day. It's just silly.
I agree. If it were a normal person adopting the child, it wouldn't have made the news at all! I think she was trying to do some good and help make her family complete, and the media is blowing it way out of proportion.
Why not adopt kids out of American foster homes...? We have babies suffering here too... Not saying that people adopting foregin babies isn't good- it is. But we have kids here that need help too.
Also...this trend of adoption...do these stars know how to be parents..?
Hail The PitGodess!
Yeah I guess I didn't detail that it's been increasingly difficult to adopt domestically. Studies show that more birth mothers are deciding to keep the babies.