|
Update
Here is what is on the website now:
READERS RESPOND
Brangelina Adoption Article Sparks Outcry
The adoption community takes umbrage with our piece on the Jolie/Pitt baby train.
On June 27, the Latimes.com entertainment page ran an article by Leslie Gornstein entitled " How to Shop for Kids the Brangelina Way." Playing off the celebrity couple's plans to adopt a third child from a Third World couple, the article took a lighthearted look at the travails they might face heading into the adoption markets of various corners of the globe.
Many readers took exception to the tone of the piece. In the interest of representing our readers' views on the site, we offer below an extended and hopefully representative selection of the dozens of e-mails we received criticizing the article.
The response of the article's editor is here.
Many thanks to all those who wrote in and shared their views. What an ignorant and offensive article. I can't believe any reputable agency would allow an article like this to be associated with them. Even if you hate Angelina Jolie and I don't care if you do, you should not refer to kids as "moppets" or souvenirs, or a call-in order. There are tens of thousands of adoptive families in this country and it is just rude and ignorant to assume that is how adoptive families come together. It is a painful and difficult process with a lot of scrutiny and we love our children as any parent and family does. This article is just pure ignorance and I honestly feel your paper should print an apology for being so demeaning, degrading of children and adoption. Please, we have enough to overcome without people printing unbiased truths and ignorance like this only spreading hate and bigotry. Jennifer Stoltzfus
I want to include my voice in opposition to your newspaper publishing such a horrendously offensive article (editorial? I'm not sure what to call it). Does the writer (not to mention editor who allowed it to go to press) have no concept for how hurtful the article was on so many levels. Angelina Jolie has done more for the hundreds of thousands of struggling children in the world than probably just about anyone on the planet. In addition to donating a third of her income and countless hours of her time to causes that promote the welfare of children, she has adopted two children who otherwise would have had very difficult and probably very short lives. I can't understand why her situation would lead someone to poke fun at her. Her comments about the factors the family is considering in deciding where their next child will come from are legitimate. Building a family is not a game and it is not a shopping trip. On a more general level, your article was mean-spirited and hurtful to all adoptive families. I hope someone at your paper feels shame and remorse for publishing such trash. I wouldn't expect to read junk like this in the Enquirer much less a "real paper." I hope your staff will reflect on the tragic situation of so many parentless children around the world (including the U.S.) and, instead of making fun of those who are helping to solve the problem, try to find a way to contribute the solution. Susan Hunt
Fruit Heights, Utah
I am all for freedom of the press so I believe the author had every right to write the piece and you had every right to print it but wow
that is one offensive piece of junk. I am adopting a child from Ethiopia. We are not adopting a rugrat or a moppet. We are adopting a child. Maybe the author was trying to be funny...maybe she was trying her best to witty. She failed at both. Instead of a discussion about the requirements for each country, she made it seem like going "shopping" for a new handbag. My child is a real person. I am not shopping for him. Your author should have valued the lives of these children much more. Michele Favaro
Your recent article regarding international adoption was not about Angelina Jolie, it was a cheap shot at international adoptions. As a single mother of two beautiful angels adopted internationally, I found your article extremely distasteful. Shame on you. I thought you were a newspaper, not a tabloid. And I doubt a tabloid would attack children. Diana L. Hare
Springfield, Ill.
Have you been made aware of the postings on the Internet about this article? Those of us (average folks) adopting from another country are expressing opinions on the WWW I wanted to make you aware of. Anyway, I request that you please educate yourselves regarding the process and the emotional and financial impact on us regular folk. Right now all the families adopting from Guatemala are having difficulty regarding a process called PGN (check it out and please help if you can). I think you will then understand the uproar and sadness that has been created by the article. (And yes, I think Angie needs to grow up regarding her view of adoptive children!) Rosemary Hickman
Evans, Ga.
My daughter is from a small orphanage in Khabarovsk, Russia
. While it was very expensive to adopt her with fees paid to the state of Texas, Social Workers, the United States goverment, the government of Russia, facilitator, attorney, and travel fees I did not purchase her. She is my daughter. Thousands of people each year chose international adoption to build their families. Children without a hope of a family find the love, warmth, and safety of parents and extended family who love them deeply. The world is changed forever as a result of the miracle of adoption. While it can be very expensive, so is domestic adoption, and so is birth for those without government assistance or health insurance. It does not mean that the children are purchased that children are a commodity. When you treat our children as a commodity to diminish them and our love for them you set them up for ridicule. You may not like Angelina, but leave the children alone. Merinda K. Condra
Was Leslie G.'s smart-*** article about where Angelina Jolie might adopt next really necessary? Were you really that short on actual information and/or entertainment that you needed to fill space with such nonsense? My daughters were adopted from China several years ago, so yes, I have a vested interest in any media coverage of international adoption, valid or otherwise. My first reaction, upon reading the article in question this week was not to react at all it simply isn't deserving of one speck of additional attention. But while factually valid in terms of statistics and requirements of the countries she mentions, it tidily reduced my children and the hundreds of thousands like them who live and are loved in this country to something equivalent to, say, fashion accessories. Whether one cares for Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt or not is well beside the point. They will, I feel quite certain, continue to do their level best to make a positive difference on behalf of refugees around the world who have no power of their own, and they will continue to do their best on behalf of their children, no matter how said children become theirs, or what color their skin or where they were born. Because they make their significant livings in the public eye, they must endure the sad, mindless side of the public, made all the more obnoxious by Ms. G. and her ilk. Sad, but a fact of their lives. The fact that they are weighing the best interests of Maddox and Zahara in the decision as to how next to add to their family speaks volumes about who they are. And fortunately, nothing your rag prints can diminish that or what they are doing. If only more celebrities, many of whom have entirely more money than sense, would spend a full third of their incomes helping a cause or causes that benefit others. Wow. Hard to even imagine such world. The hard side of articles like this, though, is the insidious effect it has upon the opinions of the public uneducated in international adoption, or any kind of adoption, for that matter. And unfortunately, that public is part of the bigger culture in which my daughters are growing up. A culture in which black kids yell out the bus window at my Asian daughters that they don't belong here. A culture in which perfect strangers believe stopping me and my toddler in Target and asking me how much she cost is an acceptable bit of small talk. As if she were an item, a thing, a curiosity less than human. A culture in which my daughters are always going to be judged by the color of their hair and the shape of their eyes by strangers who can't be bothered to take the time to get to know them as people first. They are strong ones, my girls. They are beautiful, smart, complex, hilarious, frustrating, amazing people, just coming into their own, just beginning to figure out who they are. Old enough to pick up a newspaper and read it, yet not quite old enough not to be worried that their father and I found them in a "baby machine" on the other side of the world. Because that negates the families who most likely continue to mourn the loss of them, and it negates the complexity of the culture that likely forced those families to let them go. The article completely negates the decision-making process, a long and arduous one, that preceded their adoptions. It insinuates that all adoptive families are made of money, and that we just spin the wheel to determine where we'll throw it to buy our next pet. Unless one has spent time emotionally invested in some aspect of adoption, one really has no business writing fluff on such a topic. Oh, but wait. So much media doesn't require actual integrity out of its writers. Integrity seems to become more and more something our culture, and the media that steers it, sorely lacks. Silly me for forgetting. The good news is that those in the adoption community who actually live in L.A. remind the rest of us, with much sincerity, to take anything the L.A. Times says with a grain of salt because, after all, it is L.A. Not exactly the font of reality. Right. We must keep this in mind. On top of that, I will keep in mind that this article made no pretense about being an educational piece on adoption. It was "entertainment fluff," nothing more. Right again. Except that sadly, too many people especially the teens and preteens with whom my kids interact, aren't yet savvy enough to tell the difference. And sadly, our media won't take the responsibility to help them do so. Maybe someday. Everyone has to have a goal, right? Mindy Carney
St. Louis, Missouri
I don't often find myself writing such letters but I was so disturbed by this piece of entertainment "news" I simply had to comment. Despite considerable effort, I fail to see the wisdom or value in bashing celebrity lifestyle choices and likewise insulting the tens of thousands of people in this country who's lives have been impacted by international adoption. Orphaned children regarded by this "writer" as little more than handbags? Classy. My disgust aside, if the purpose of this article was to entertain or shock, ("How to Shop for Kids...ample pickin's...she could phone in her baby order...") it fails miserably as it is both juvenile and unimaginative. Quite honestly, it reads more like an essay from some 3rd grade comedic writing contest. My congrats to the winner of the presumed contest who, being more talented than Leslie Gornstein, more likely focused on fart and barf jokes. Candy Robertson
Tallahassee, Fla.
I am writing to let you know that I found the article "How to Shop for Kids the Brangelina Way" very insulting. Reading it made me sick to my stomach. How could you allow an article to be published that is so hurtful to both Ms. Jolie and to everyone who has adopted a child internationally? It makes me feel sad that my son who was adopted internationally could someday come across this article. How do you think this will make a child feel to know that others look at his adoption as a purchase? This is so untrue and very offensive. To imply that families who have saved for years and sacrificed in order to provide a child with a loving home, were actually just out shopping for little "moppets" or "rugrats" is disgusting! I believe the L.A. Times owes the adoption community an apology. I hope you print our comments in your paper along with our much-deserved apology. Lori
I wanted to express my extreme disgust at the content and tone of the article you published about Angelina Jolie and internationally adopted children. I found this article to be unbelievably offensive to both adoptees and adoptive parents. Your references to adopted children as "moppets" or "rugrats" is degrading to these children who have done nothing to justify these insults. Your insinuations that these children were paid for is simply terrible. Families who have adopted have paid the fees required to process the adoption, they have not paid for children. To insinuate something else is offensive. I can only imagine the hurt that an adoptee would feel reading this type of article. I am so thankful that my son is too young yet to be hurt by this. Please note, I realize that that this article was written in a way that would poke fun at and insult a celebrity for her choices on how she builds her family, (which I also feel was wrong of this reporter) but I think it is important to realize that this type of article will hurt other people as well. I believe that this reporter and also your newspaper should apologize for the insults included in this article. Lisa
As an adoptive parent, I must object to various aspects of both tone and content of this article. I realize the writer intended to be sarcastic, and humorous, but she combined that with information about international adoption and source countries, as if to provide credence to her cause. The overall tone of this piece was an attack on Jolie and celebrity behavior in general, however, there were unintended (perhaps) victims as well. The language used to refer to children was hateful, and the attitude of the writer toward International Adoption was as well. My children are fortunately too young to have read this article, however I know many international adoptees in the community who read it and were saddened by its callousness. In short, the writer missed her mark and in so doing offended many others. I am saddened that your editors were not sensitive enough to recognize the harm lurking in this fluff piece. Linda Fox
Kansas City, Mo.
I am writing in reference to your article about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt considering adopting another child. The article was by far the most insensitive thing I have ever read about adoption. As the parent of a foreign adopted child, I strive to educate people about the situations surrounding adoption both domestic and abroad. An article like this does much harm to our adoption community. These children were adopted because their parents were forced to abandon them mostly due to financial strain and these children will always have a sense of loss of both their biological parents and their culture. It is unfortunate that they should have to experience those things but it is even more unfortunate for them to have to have adoption sensationalized and ridiculed by Americans. Many countries see Americans as unbearable, rude, snobbish, and pushy people, even in the adoption areas. After reading an article such as this, it's no wonder some countries despise Americans adopting children and taking them away from their home countries. I truly wish you would educate yourself as to the harm that can be caused by publishing such an article and would strongly reconsider posting anything like this again. Amy Deshotel
My name is Denise Greer. I am writing you in response to the story of "How to Shop for Kids the Brangelina Way" This story was highly offensive and teetered on obscene. How can a respectable newspaper print this story? Describing China as "an adorable, adoptable-children machine," then calling the children "rugrats." Describing Russia as "the second biggest supplier of adoptable moppets." This list could go on and on. This "story" is nothing but inflammatory. I would like to give Leslie Gornstein an education on how to talk about adoption and what adoption is all about. It is not "baby buying." We do not look upon our children as commodities. They are our children. They deserve better than to be called the names that I read in this article. Our children's original countries also deserve proper respect. My sons will be able to read soon and they do not need to read trash like this about how we chose to create our family. Thank you for reading this and I hope that I do not see any more stories such as this in your newspaper. Denise Greer
I just finished reading the article "How to Shop for Kids the Brangelina Way" on the L.A. Times website. Shame, shame, shame. How disgraceful an article. And how disrespectful to the thousands of adoptees and adoptive families in our country. Families do not "shop" for kids. Adoption is just one way to build a family. The author's total disregard for the human component of adoption is sad. It's not like someone purchased a purebred dog or race horse. We are talking about humans, children, families. You owe it to your readers, many of whom have an adoption connection to present stories that are respectful and contain positive and accurate information. An apology to the adoption community is warranted. Jan Fonger
What an offensive article! This article was written without the least bit of empathy and respect for those millions of families whose only option for having children is to adopt. For whatever personal reasons, many choose to adopt internationally, which is their God-given right! Leslie Gornstein's article was inexplicably void of that very fact. She wrote this for entertainment fodder, not as a testament to the many families who are formed every day by this gift of adoption. Many of us struggle with this decision and it's not made willy-nilly because we have millions of dollars and are trying to make ourselves look good to the public. If Ms. Gornstein had bothered to interview families who have gone through the process and find out what led them to this decision, she would have seen it's not a "trendy" decision. I'm not bashing Angelina Jolie...like the rest of us, she can build her family any way she wants. However, please do not put all of us in the same "boat" as her, when our decisions as to why we adopt, and do so internationally, are very personal and different. As for referring to the children we adopt as "rugrats" and "moppets," how disgustingly rude and crude. Apparently Ms. Gornstein isn't a parent, and if she is, she should be ashamed of herself. Would she like her children to be referred to in this manner? Well, we don't. Have some respect for these children who are often abandoned shortly after they are brought into this world, are left alone, hungry and cold. These children have to live with hundreds of other abandoned and neglected children, who are craving love and attention from someone who will always be there for them. We do not "shop" for our children...we are growing our families. This is not just some random, spur of the moment decision, like buying shoes or groceries. We were not given the option to have children naturally, so we have to find other means and for most, that is adoption. Unfortunately, this does cost money to execute, but the rewards far outweigh the cost and is something not entered into lightly. Ms. Gornstein...shame on you and your uneducated, heartless "entertainment" story. David and Kari Frost
Washington state
This is by far the worst piece of trash journalism I have ever read, even if it was just meant to be an "entertaining" tongue-in-cheek spoof of Angelina Jolie! This reduces children, whether adopted or biological, to commodities to be bought and sold, like driving up to a McDonald's and ordering a No. 7 value meal with extra BBQ sauce! The so-called journalist Leslie Gornstein should explore the process of adoption a bit more before making such cruel and crass attempts at humor. This article brought tears to the eyes of those of us who have adopted. Our children are "our children" no matter how they came to us. I would think the L.A. Times would have more educated journalists, but apparently not. Shannon Fanourakis
"How to Shop for Kids the Brangelina Way" is not cute, not funny, way stupid. To say, even in jest, that adoptive parents "shop" for their children is just irresponsible it just hurts children. Maybe celebrities are fair game for this kind of "journalism," but children are not. Think before you write or publish supposedly satirical pieces. Whom do you affect? Whom do you hurt? Adoptive families and children do not deserve to be the focus of this kind of snotty, let's-just-attack-to-be-funny reporting (if you can call it reporting). Even Angelina Jolie does not. Barbara Turvett
This article is disgusting. As a parent of a daughter adopted from China who was abandoned on the side of the road at 5 weeks old and put into an orphanage with deplorable conditions until we were able to come and adopt her at 9 months old (traveling during the SARS epidemic no less) adopting a child is not a joke it is not shopping it is none of the things in your highly offensive article. Do you have NO EMPATHY for the adopted kids, many of whom come from severely undernourished, horrible conditions? How do you think the 9- and 10-year-old adopted children would feel reading your article. Do you have any idea how many people you have offended with this article? If you want to save face in any way I would suggest submitting an apology for printing this article immediately.
Rebecca Loeb
New York
I'm all for freedom of speech, but if Leslie Gornstein is ever again allowed to dispense her views in nearly such a ubiquitous vessel as the L.A. Times, then surely the industry of journalism has sunk to an even lower standard of ethics than I feared. Does Ms. Gornstein realize that many of our "adorable, adoptable children" are now old enough to read? Susan Thompson
East Haven, Conn.
I've just read Leslie Gornstein's article "How to Shop for Kids the Brangelina Way" with total disgust. I found it very insulting to people whose only option for family building is through adoption. While it can be "funny" to jab at Brad/Angelina, I think Ms Gornstein has taken the joke too far. It sounds more like she is poking fun at the waiting children (and waiting families, adopted children, and adoptive families) than Brad/Angelina. Particularly disturbing are Ms Gornstein's revolting, abhorrent comments such as "ample picken's" and describing adoption as "snatching" a child. Stephanie Dahl
In response to the Leslie Gornstein article about international adoption: My journey to get my baby will begin on July 13 when my husband and I leave for China. Correction: this journey began over 2 years ago when we found ourselves in the land of "unexplained infertility." Determined to become parents, we let go the fantasy of becoming parents "the old fashioned way" and realized that we could bring together our family through adoption. Ms. Gornstein frames adoption as if it is a game or a mail order catalog which disrespects mothers like me who only want to love the baby that found her way into our lives. My journey to get my baby has been born out of a long, sometimes excruciating, decision by myself and my husband to make our family. Nothing about this decision has been taken lightly by us. Please be more responsible to parents like us who simply want to make our family. Mary Lampe
Editor's reply: The editors and writer Leslie Gornstein were satirizing a specific person, Angelina Jolie, who had remarked that her next adoption would depend on "which country, which race would fit best with the kids." The satire was in no way intended to be a commentary on all individuals who adopt.
|
06-30-2006, 12:33 PM
Linear Mode
