1 of 8

Hurting

Write now Article Tools

Celebrity adoptions seem to the flavour of the month. With Hollywood stars including Madonna and Meg Ryan joining the infamous list of proud parents of adopted children, controversy surrounding this "adoption fever" is at an all time high. Some see celebrity adoptions as a great way of giving some children a second chance at life as well as bringing public awareness to the poverty of third-world countries. However, others point to the stars' erratic behaviours, partying lifestyle and the message of "money buys all" as reasons why celebrities should not be allowed to adopt kids. So, at the end of the day, are celebrity adoptions helping international adoption relations?

I don't think so.

Firstly, it is undeniable that celebrity adoptions are great at bringing public awareness to the children suffering in poverty-stricken countries. With power, influence and, of course, money and resources, celebrities are more than capable of supporting an adopted child. For example, it is public knowledge that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have hired one nanny for every single one of their kids, three of which are adopted. With this type of constant monitoring and care along with an endless supply of toys and gifts, these children have definitely been given a second chance at life. After all, these children were living in horrible conditions and could have possibly starved to death or died from any of the numerous diseases that still prevail in third-world countries. Even if their celebrity parent's didn't love them or give them enough attention, they would have been living in a life that was much more superior to their previous one and possibly even better than most of the kids growing up in a normal modest family in developed nations. They have literally been "saved."

However, we must wonder why are these celebrities suddenly adopting kids left, right and centre? One couldn't help comparing images of Brangelina with their large horde of children and someone like Paris Hilton clutching a dog in her handbag. Are both simply fashion statements or public stunts?

Think back to 2005 when America was eyeing at Angelina with suspicion over the public scandals with Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston, how did she divert the anger away from her? She adopted an Ethiopian baby Zahara. At that time, I was thinking: one kid, great. Two kids, she obviously cares. But three? And looking for one more? Not even normal families have that many biological children, which brings me to the next problem, normal families wanting to adopt.

There are possibly hundreds of normal ordinary couples out there who want to adopt because either they can't have children or simply out of the generosity of their hearts. Yet they have to go through many applications, procedural checks and often get knocked back whereas celebrities can simply waltz into a country, throw a couple of millions of dollars around and choose a kid to adopt as if picking a pet from the local pet shop. It hardly seems fair that celebrities, simply due to their fame and money, can cut the queue. This message of "money buys all" is a message that does not help international adoption relations. Would you trust a child with celebrities that frequently indulges in alcohol and scandals or with the childless couple next door? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

In the end, I admit that there are some celebrities out there who adopt out simply because they want to help but at the same time, others are probably doing it just for more fame. Children, regardless of their origin, race and gender, deserve unconditional love something that money can't buy.

Learn more about this author, Y Tian.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Are celebrity adoptions helping or hurting international adoption relations??
We want to hear your view. Write now!