Celebrity Adoptions

It's the latest Hollywood accessory -- adopt a baby, and you don't even have to get all that icky pregnancy fat!  Everyone is doing it -- Sheryl Crowe,  Madonna,  Brad and Angelina, and so many more! 

Now you would think that Brad and Angelina are the darlings of the adoptive community.  After all, they are adopting a fifth child in five years!  With kids from all over the world! 

Most of us hate them.

They miss opportunities again and again and again to change the world's attitude about adoption. 

They are adopting from certain regions and having bio kids to "balance" their family.  If race really doesn't matter in adoption, then why do you need a matching set of each?

They don't correct interviewers who talk about their "real" children. 

They don't insist on positive adoption language.

They aren't required to jump through the same hoops the rest of us are.  In a way, that's a loss for them, because they never connect with the wider adoptive community. 

They jet around the world to expose their kids to "culture," when study after study shows that kids adopted from orphanages crave stability.  These kids need a minimum of two years between adoptions to bond, heal, and recover from years of trauma and turmoil.  They need high structure, lots of attention, and often need access to sensory and psychological therapy.

Five kids in five years, with another (or two) on the way?

It's like watching the next generation of anti-adoption advocates developing before our eyes.

Are we in the adoptive community too hard on these celebrities?  These people aren't famous for their brains, after all...  What do you think?

Comments

[Nan]

OK - I'm back. LM's in bed, my best friend just called to tell me she's getting married (yeah!!!), and I can finally tune back in.

Ah - celebrity adoptions. A topic at work today was more about people being properly prepared to be parents or not. The point I made was that those of us who've gone through adoption have had to jump through hoops to get here (not knocking all bio parents, just the ones who knock their kids).

Anyway, I wonder what the authorities are thinking by waiving those requirements for the celebs? Is it a hope that other, perhaps better prepared but more 'normal' people will follow their lead? Do they hope that the children who may be damaged by these perhaps less than perfect placements will be loss-leaders in finding good homes for other children?

But how much mis-perception is floating out there about adoptive parents or the adoption process based on what these folks do or don't do?

And how much damage is done to local efforts to boost domestic adoption if people see their country's children not only being adopted away, but in such public and often controversial circumstances?

At times I struggle with being an IA parent, just as I struggle with just being a parent. I'm concerned with the impact that our impending move will have on LM. I'm concerned about so many things...All I can think of sometimes is that we have a good solid life out of the limelight and with a great support structure.

[Annika]

Ahh, Brangelina. They aren't adopting, they are "saving" children. And by the looks of it, they plan to save ALL OF THEM. Not that I think we are going to run out of children for everyone else, but gee whiz. PAY ATTENTION TO THE ONES YOU'VE GOT. I wouldn't dream of putting a cap on family size, but when you are in control of how quickly it's growing, and are parenting children who need bonding and recovery, SLOW DOWN.

And the "real children" thing makes me SICK.

(I'm so sorry I'm late to the party. I managed to donate on my way out the door this morning--kind of threw the money at the computer if I am being honest--and have been running around like a crazy woman all day. Please pass the tea, I'm parched!)

[ericalil]

Yo! No time to weigh in on the subject yet, but I love the earl gray!