Madonna

Money cuts thru bureaucracy, for those without money it's a wall that takes a long time to get thru if at all.

In this one instance Madge got what she wanted, the child got a shot at a better life, some people here and there made some money and the wretched father was ignored, all is as it should be.

There seems to be more argument from personal animous towards Madonna, either from hasty prejudices of her character, or simply because she is wealthy, than any real logic in the argument. I have no brief for supporting this women, and you can be sure I have scant regard for the wealthy simply for being wealthy, but this outrage seems misplaced. How many times in this thread has the phrase 'fashionable' or 'fashion accessory' been used, despite any evidence that this is the case. You don't know this women's thinking - she may be entirely sincere.

As for why an African baby, perhap she thinks rescuing an African baby with few opportunieis in her home country will do more net good than adopting an American baby where such a child would tend to have many more opportunities. Perhaps she simply likes the anti-racist statement such a family makes. If so, I can see her point.

Filter out the resentment of Madonna simply because of her wealth and celebrity, and all that's left of the argument against her is that she subverted the established process. A p[rocess introduced by self-interested GOs and NGOs who all want to keep their own jobs. If nothing else, this affair will give those organisations a much needed shot of adrenalin.

I've set down quite clearly the logical objections I have to this adoption. Objections that are shared by respected child charities, the UN and even Malawian law. It is the weakest of arguments to group-label those of us who object, as being jealous of Madonna's wealth or prejudicial towards her character. The simple truth is (and if you read back you will see this is one of my earlier arguments) that Madonna's character, motivation and suitability to adopt this child, are as much a mystery to you as they are to me. There has been no proper child services oversight to this adoption and local anti trafficking law has been corrupted to facilitate it. It is simply ridiculous to claim that this is only objectionable because of some jealousy or animosity. The flaw in your argument extends beyond those in here who have objected; you accused the UN and one of the most respected child aid charities in the world of basing their objections on vested interests. Our objections to this adoption are entirely logical, yours on the other hand rely on accusatory tactics against those who object.

My objections to this adoption (and I suspect most others) would vanish if Madonna went through the usual pre-adoption child services screening and oversight in her usual country of residence (The UK or US) and she PUBLICLY abided by the laws set in place to prevent child trafficking in the adoptee's country. Why are you so adamant that she shouldn't have to do this?

Actually, I meant to put "from everybody except YMG, whose argument has some substance, but which I just don't happen to buy".

What child-trafficking laws has she broken again?

Oooh, you silver tongued bugger

Child trafficking laws to stop unscrupulous foreigners from adopting children to take out of the country for prostitution/indentured servitude etc (which apparently is a big problem) by making it compulsory for adoptive parents to have been resident for a minimum of 18 months.

And yes, I'm fully aware that Madge is not a child Trafficker in that sense, but she has still deliberately and very publicly emasculated a law designed to protect children in Malawi.

Well if you're right, at least this will have highlighted that it can be broken with money. For all we know it's always been going on.

From what I understand, by reading an article when this broke as a story first time around, these sort of laws are being introduced region-wide after lobby campaigns by UNICEF and the various other UN Child Development Agencies in collaboration with organisations such as Save the Children in Southern Africa in a concerted effort to tackle child trafficking. In all likelihood, laws such as this are probably pretty tough to get working properly under local conditions at the best of times.... However, the first Malawian judge tried to do just that by doing what the law required him to do and declining Madonna's request on precisely the grounds he should have. Madonna's legal and political chicanery here has completely undermined that attempt to give these anti-trafficking law any credibility.

We all know that corruption is pretty hard to stamp out at any rate, but when an attempt by the local judiciary to enforce the rule of law is so blatantly and publicly corrupted in this way, it will be near impossible. Madonna hasn't highlighted a problem here (we all pretty much knew the system is corrupt) she has, by doing as she has done, stomped all over one of the rare occasions that corruption wasn't factored into a ruling. There is virtually no chance of getting laws like this off the ground and working as they should, if Hollywood celebrities very publicly come in and piss all over the proper rule of law in order to get their own way.

So... Anybody think Elton John's attempt to join the celebrity bandwagon and acquire the ultimate accessory is a good idea, then?

Normally i'd be against "the gays" adopting... ....

Obviously Eltons age should exclude him from adopting a young baby, but in this case where the child has a terminal desiese and it's quite likely elton will out live his adoptive child ensuring the best health care and more love than they're recieving now I have to say rock on grandad...

Does it say the child is HIV positive in that link? I used to fish with a bloke who went to school with Fat Reggie Dwight. He told me he was the most disliked kid in the school. I, personally, have no time for the assclown. I used to live near his mansion in Rickmansworth where he often had extremely loud parties populated by leather clad young studmuffins. I don't care whether he's gay, straight, rich or poor. I've always thought he was a total wanker.

Actually, modern anitretroviral treatments have lead to a life expectancy of 30 or 40 more years following a HIV diagnosis, so it is entirely likely that this child (should he have HIV) will outlive Elton by some years.

Would the child have the opportunity to have those medications without Eltons wad..... ahem! of cash!

Would Elton John be legally able to adopt a similar child in this country?

The arguement seems to be along the same lines as Madonna and that Jolie bird, it's fine for a celeb to cherry pick small kids from other countries even though they probably wouldn't be able to do so in their country of residency.