The media clip you are about to view is about Madonna and how her petition to adopt a child from Malawi got turned down.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/showbiz/2009/04/03/bpr.madonna.adoption.ntaba.cnn
In order to internationally adopt from Malawi, an individual must be a resident there for more than a year. Madonna did not fit this requirement and that is why she could not adopt 4-year-old, Mercy James. However, in 2006, Madonna adopted her son, David, and the discussion of residency requirements did not come up. Human rights activists accused Madonna for using her fame in the past to take advantage of Malawi’s weak child protection system, and they wanted to make sure it did not happen again. However, Madonna and many Malawian citizens felt she was being treated unfairly especially after all she has done for Malawi. For several years Madonna has had ties to Malawi and has been trying to make a difference. She made a documentary, “I Am Because We Are,” which focused on poverty, AIDS, and other diseases devastating children in that country. Also, because Malawi is one of the poorest and least developed countries in the world, Madonna began a non-profit organization called, “Raising Malawi,” which provides programs for the many that are needy. After Madonna’s efforts in Malawi, she and many others were stunned when she was unable to adopt. However, others argue that it is important for the child to grow up where they are born and to stay close to their heritage, even if it means living in an orphanage like Mercy James will have to do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that Madonna should be able to take control of Mercy James. Although the child may not get the typical childhood that other children of Malawi culture, Madonna is able to give them one of the essentials. That is love, shelter, and food. This child would definitely have those types of things if he/she was adopted. Other than that I have a hard time going with the adoption agency claiming that Madonna shouldn't adopt a child because her residency is in question. A person of her caliber should be able to bypass the system sometimes. We have seen her track record. She should have been given a break.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Madonna has only positive intentions in her adoptions, I do not think she should be able to get around the rules because of her name. The process of adoption is long and hard, and there are many people that want to adopt but are not able to because of one rule or another, Madonna being one of them. If people are trying to get around the rules for adoption, then maybe the rules should be evaluated so that people like Madonna are able to adopt without having to break them. I posted a link to an interesting YouTube video about Madonna’s efforts in Malawi below.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CKh3CBRzjA
Even though Madonna has been in the spotlight lately for all of her work in Malawi, there is a reason why they have a rule that an individual has to be a resident in the country for more than a year to be eligible for adoption. It is important to make sure people are adopting for the right reasons. Living in Malawi for a year seems like a long time, but it can be a chance for people who potentially want to adopt to learn about the area and the children living there. I also see the other side to it as well. Letting Madonna adopt again from this area raises awareness for the poor conditions of the area and could potentially give other families the chance to adopt children and give them a better life.
ReplyDeleteI believe Madonna should not be the exception to the rule in this case. Rules are rules and in this case, the rules are important to the process of adoption in Malawi. She already received preferential treatment in her first adoption attempt. There is no reason why her celebrity status should allow her to be exempt from following the rules. If she really wants another child to adopt, she has to understand the laws of the country.
ReplyDeleteThe Malawi government is being unjust in denying Madonna the chance to do something amazing, better the life of a child. First of all, she has already adopted a child from Malawi without the required 1 year residency. Why would they deny her the second time around? Her adopted Malawian son David is probably much better off living a live of luxury than one of poverty. The child in question, Mercy James, just won the lottery and the Malawi government is denying him his winnings.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that no child should be denied the right to be adopted and live a better life. The child isn't going to get very much culture by living in an orphanage anyway. I think the Malawi government may just be worried about Madonna attracting too much attention to Malawi's orphans, and that there will be a major rush to adopt Malawi's youth. This, of course, will most likely not be the case. So the only issue I am seeing here is Malawi maybe not allowing Madonna to adopt Mercy for media attention. Who knows...
ReplyDeleteThis may seem a little harsh, but I might even say this dilemma might be a PR stunt. If Madonna has spent so much time in Malawi and has formally adopted a child there before, she should also be aware of the legality issues associated with child adoption. Despite the fact she had the rules bent for her once, she should not expect the same kind of treatment just because she sings for a living. Furthermore, it is slight distressing to me that adopting a foreign born child is turning into the latest Hollywood trend. It seems strange with so many needy children in our own country, stars feel such an incredible connection with children of other nations. Here is an interesting clip that claims, "Madonna says adoption is no one's business."
ReplyDeleteI do think that Madonna should be allowed to adopt Mercy James. The child would be given a better home and infinite opportunities opposed to staying in Malawi where there a little to no opportunities. However, I don't understand why Madonna can't just comply with the laws in place. I realize that she got around the law before, but that should make her all the more inclined to what to fulfill her duty this time around. If she truly cares for the child, she will spend the required time in Malawi.
ReplyDelete