[Waiting4Celeste]

Really, Today Show?

Your "expert" on the situation is a guy from People Magazine?

Really?

Did anyone see it?

ugh

He basically said - very matter-of-factly - that children need to stay in their home countries and not be adopted.

A guy who works for a magazine who reports on the Britneys, Lindseys and Parises of the world feels he can make a blanket statement about International Adoption?

Really?

I kind of expected an ad for UNICEF to scroll across the bottom of the screen while he was blabbering on like he knew what he was talking about.

Stick to entertainment, People Magazine.

And The Today Show should be ashamed of themselves for presenting such a one-sided opinion of International Adoption. If it's an "Entertainment" story then they need to leave their opinions about International Adoption in general out of it and just talk about the story.

ugh.

[mommytoEli]

i agree...children should stay in their home countries and not be adopted internationally....if they can be adequately cared for in a FAMILY. for me, that's the key. i read somewhere that Korea was looking forward to no longer processing international adoptions. i think that is exciting for them, and it "sounds" like they are making changes to their system in order to care for their children in families. i say kudos to them. HOWEVER, when a country is unable to provide a family environment for children in their care, i will disagree....i think it is better for a child to be raised in a family in another country over an institution in their own. but i know everyone has different opinions on that...i just won't let it change mine.

i DO find it interesting that i do not feel like i see/hear AS MUCH bad press when angelina jolie does it. or meg ryan. does anyone else feel that way? i often wonder if it is because of the country she chose to adopt from, or the actress herself.

[SKL]

Between the way the media selects its "experts" and the way the general public thinks they can see into the hearts of people they don't even know, I just don't want to hear any of it. It's sad, because people who really want to do honest research are hindered by these media outlets that exchange responsibility for short-term financial gains.

[cattlefarms]

Just my personal opinion, but when someone like Madonna who has a lot of money can fly into a country after forgoing the countries adoption timelines, and there requirements for number of siblings etc. and pick out a child , then Adopt. What is that? That right there makes International Adoption look bad! Money does talk in this case.

Where is her two year wait like the rest of us. The country themselves when under fire said they do what is in the best interest of each child, and if their family agrees then adoptions can be facilitaed much quicker. Well where do we all stand in line I ask. Because I am sure all of us who have been through the trials and waits of adoption would like to know who to contact. I am also certain all of the other kids waiting in the orphanages would like to know why not them.

Kristi

[DDAmasa]

Save the Children in Britain has also been vocal in saying Madonna is setting a bad example by removing children from their home countries and bringing them to live in England. Their position is children, even orphans with no family able to care for them, are better off in orphanages in their own countries than being adopted and brought to Britain. I can't begin to understand their logic. I keep wondering if there is some xenophobia or even racism involved in these organizations being so desperate to keep these children living in poor communities with no family rather than being adopted and having loving families who may be of a different race or speak a different language, as if different ethnic groups and races are different species which need to stay in their own designated places on the globe among their own kind to be happy.

[avoel]

Does anyone know if Malawi is officially open to adoption for citizens of Great Britain? I tried to look it up on the State Department website for the US and there is not even a page for it as a country under International Adoption. Definitely doesn't seem to be open for US citizens.

I don't think it helps when she picks a country that is not OPEN to adoption...meaning that not just any British citizen could go there and adopt. That is when it sounds like she is stepping in, choosing a child and pulling strings. But...maybe they can. I don't know. Overall I think anytime a child who legitimately needs a home finds one, it is a good thing.

I am upset by the media coverage of the child's identity and story though. That is not necessary and Madonna herself should not allow that to happen. The adoption is not even final.

[MomtoJABE]

They are not open for adoption now and weren't when she brought her first little boy home. I was just listening to a report on that yesterday and they were saying that it is interesting how she is able to go into a country that is closed to adoptions and bring home a child. They also said she would be in court this week to get their permission to take this child out of the country.

[Waiting4Celeste]

Originally Posted by mommytoEli

i agree...children should stay in their home countries and not be adopted internationally....if they can be adequately cared for in a FAMILY. for me, that's the key. i read somewhere that Korea was looking forward to no longer processing international adoptions. i think that is exciting for them, and it "sounds" like they are making changes to their system in order to care for their children in families. i say kudos to them. HOWEVER, when a country is unable to provide a family environment for children in their care, i will disagree....i think it is better for a child to be raised in a family in another country over an institution in their own. but i know everyone has different opinions on that...i just won't let it change mine.

I TOTALLY agree with you... and I have said it before - in a "perfect" world - there would be no need for adoption. People who are ready and want a child and could provide for a child would be able to have children and for those people are AREN'T ready to have children - they wouldn't.

But we live in a fallen world and there IS a need for adoption and too many children are caught in the middle of a political issue. If there are people wanting children and children needing homes - I wish there was a better way to make it happen.

But - my point about his comment was that he made it so flippantly that I can just see people tuning in and believing he was some "expert" about international adoption when he is actually an employee of an entertainment magazine. I'm assuming he did more research about Madonna than about international adoption - so he should stick to what he knows. Or the Today Show should have at least had an expert on there to talk about International Adoption.

OK, OK, I'm living in a fantasy world thinking that the media would cover both sides.

*sigh*

[mksilvermoon]

to my knowledge Malawi is not any more open to british adopters than to usa adopters - i have actually donated to Save the Children charity for many years - and i feel SO angry at the language they have used with this 'story' - i rang them up yesterday and vente and said i will be cancelling my donations (which i will)

they do good work - but like unicef are getting on the fundraising bandwagon/political lobbying

THEY are an interested party - they need children to stay in orphanages so they can fundraise to look after them and stay in their well-paid jobs ... i have worked for many different charities and what happens as they get bigger is that they stop focussing on their 'cause' and start focussing on 'empire building' - this is empire building - they are generating free publcity for themselves as far as i am concerned

and i DO disagree with how madonna is doing this BUT i don't blame her - she has money and is used to getting her own way - i lay the majority of blame at the feet of the two governments involved ... malawi & the UK - i could have gone to guatemala and 'completed' an adoption but i would not have been allowed out of guatemala without the right papers and i would NOT have been allowed back into the UK without approval from the immigration authorities etc - both governments are complicit in this - i am especially stunned at the UK government

and yes - the 'climate' in UK social services is incredibly anti-adoption - home studies cost thousands of dollars, take years to get papers to other countries, obstacles at every turn and charges (monetary) from the government here at every turn

ooohhh - must get off my soapbox! am so frustrated by this

Mary-Kate

[stephjoel99]

Cindy, I TOTALLY agree with you that the People Magazine "expert" was a joke.

I can't wait for the Today Show's report on the economy this morning. Maybe they'll have someone from the National Enquirer explaining the housing bailout.

[mommytoEli]

Originally Posted by Waiting4Celeste

But - my point about his comment was that he made it so flippantly that I can just see people tuning in and believing he was some "expert" about international adoption when he is actually an employee of an entertainment magazine. I'm assuming he did more research about Madonna than about international adoption - so he should stick to what he knows. Or the Today Show should have at least had an expert on there to talk about International Adoption.

i agree...

[mommytoEli]

Originally Posted by MomtoJABE

They are not open for adoption now and weren't when she brought her first little boy home. I was just listening to a report on that yesterday and they were saying that it is interesting how she is able to go into a country that is closed to adoptions and bring home a child. They also said she would be in court this week to get their permission to take this child out of the country.

interesting. i did not know they were closed...i just assumed it was one of those open countries that is so difficult people don't typically participate in adoptions there- like in el salvador.

[crick]

Just wanted to head off the discussion of Malawi being closed to foreign adoptions.

While Malawi's laws are blurry regarding adoptions, it's not a closed country. Regulations stipulate only that prospective parents undergo an 18-24 month assessment period in Malawi. Basically it's a case by case basis.

[ocracoke]

Isn't Madonna still a US citizen who lives in the UK? Or did she change her citizenship? If a US citizen then she would need to meet the USCIS regulations in order to have a visa issued for her child. Right? And now that she is divorced (or is she just separated) how does that affect her ability to adopt as a single parent from Malawi? Does Malawi allow singles to adopt in general?

I don't know the details of this particular situation but I have questions about it.

Samantha

[JillnChris]

I'm really not surprised. The Today show often only shows one side of a situation.
This has been all over the media lately, various "experts" claiming that no child should be adopted internationally.