Adoption

One Malawian baby girl, named Mercy James.  And guess who the highest bidder is?  Madonna.

Madonna's bid to adopt a second Malawian child, a baby girl called Mercy James, will be examined by a court in the southern African country next week, officials said on Friday.

The 14-month-old would be a sister for Madonna's three children including David, whose adoption by the U.S. pop star aroused controversy, and comes from the same orphanage.

"Her name is Mercy James from Mchinji Home of Hope orphanage. She has no father and mother, they both died... We finished the assessment yesterday in readiness for the courts next week," an official at the ministry of Gender and Child Development told Reuters.

Court clerks confirmed the name of the child and said that Madonna or her associates were expected to appear in court next Monday for the adoption proceedings. She is expected to arrive in Malawi over the weekend, officials said.

Some Malawians opposed David's adoption, accusing the government of skirting laws that ban non-residents from adopting children in Malawi, which has been badly hit by an AIDS epidemic.

Mavuto Bamusi, national coordinator for the 60-member Human Rights Consultative Committee, told Reuters that this adoption would also violate the country's laws.

"As far as we are concerned, nothing has changed in terms of adoption laws in the country," he said.

Didja get that?  Adoption is banned in Malawi for non-residents.  I sincerely doubt Madonna is a resident of Malawi.  It would be beneath her to move there, and set up a mansion amidst the mud huts.  After all, that would look bad.  But, apparently, it's all right for her to swoop in and arrange to adopt a child, despite the fact the laws of the country forbid her from doing so.  You want to know how she's doing this?  Cash money, under the table.  Do I have any proof of this?  No, but this is how it's done.  She bribed someone.  Or rather "her associates" did it.  I doubt she could be bothered to tear herself away from her daily four-hour workouts, where she earns her Skeletor arms, to spread the cash around herself.  

But it gets even better, because, according to the BBC, she claims that, and I quote:

{...}After {her son, David's}the adoption was legalised, Madonna said the difficulties had arisen because "this adoption essentially was the beginning of the creation of adoption laws in Malawi".

She hoped it would make it easier for others to adopt from the country and explained: "I am the template or the role model, so to speak, for future adoptions."{...}

So, bribery is the template for future adoptions?  Geez, Madonna, talk about having a huge head.  Because there is nothing original or "role-model"-ish about bribing foreign officials to look the other way when it comes to a country's adoption laws.  That she would make the claim that she's trying to make it easier for others to adopt a child from Malawi is beyond the pale.  Beyond. The.  Pale.

I sincerely doubt Madonna is capable of shame at this late date, but she should be ashamed of herself.  She wants another baby and she's got the cash to buy one, like this little girl was a Gucci bag, so, accordingly, she's plunked down a load of cash and by the end of next week, she'll have another child.  Who she won't be bothered to care for personally, but who will get their very own nanny, or two, and then will only be pulled out for photo-ops, you know, when Madonna needs to look motherly. 

Fucking bitch. 

You see, contrary to Madonna's claims, it's precisely this kind of behavior that makes it hard for the rest of us.  You know, the majority of us who aren't loaded.  We have to go through official channels to make an international adoption happen.  We have scrutiny applied to us by actual officials.  We have to pay to have a home study done; we have to pay to be scrutinized by an adoption agency who could just take the money and then say, no, we don't think you're equipped to adopt a child.  Sorry, there's no "money-back-guarantee" on that.  Yet, if you do get accepted, you have to submit your portfolio to one country, and one country only, where you'll have to wait, possibly for years, before a child will become available, particularly if you're looking to adopt an infant.  Then, if that happy day comes, you have to shell out for adoption fees, not only in your state and country, but also in the country you're adopting from.  Then there's the airfare, which, conveniently, is priced and run through the adoption agency you're working with, so there's not really any discounts there, ya dig.  Oh, and did I mention that you'll be paying not only for your airfare, but the child's as well, and your adoption counselor's, too.  Then, when you get home, there will be even more scrutiny applied, and if the counselors get a whiff that things are not going the least bit well, the child can be pulled from your custody and sent back from whence they came.  And then you'll have to start all over again.  And the fees start all over again, too.  Another homestudy.  Another portfolio.  In the same country, or a different one, where the fees might be even higher. 

Now, keep in mind, international adoptions are meant to be easier than domestic adoptions, because other countries have a tendency to keep in mind that people are not perfect, or loaded, whereas in America, we expect perfection of prospective parents, and if you don't have a living room that rivals the Taj Mahal's, or a bank account that rivals Madonna's, you're pretty much screwed. 

(And this is only if you haven't had cancer within the last five years.  Many adoption agencies wouldn't even work with me right now because I haven't been cancer free in the last five years.  Not all agencies are like this, but the majority of them do have this condition in place.  Never mind that many countries, which also have their own medical qualifications for prospective parents, don't allow cancer survivors to adopt at all.)

Then you have to factor in the fact that there is competition to adopt.  You have competition from other prospective parents.  But, more than that, countries will have competition from other countries, because adoption is a money-making venture for governments.  Not only do they get to get one more orphan off the books---one less mouth to feed and clothe and house and educate---they also make money on the fees.  And these are the legal fees.  When someone, like that scumbag, soulless, whore Madonna slips wads of cash under the table, it encourages a black market in babies.  Because, as much as I hate Madonna for resorting to buying a baby, she's hardly the first person to do this. And, has been proven in the past, encourages an environment of institutional corruption.  To their credit, many countries have worked very hard to eliminate corruption when it comes to the adoption process, but there are plenty of countries who haven't, either.  Do you honestly think that when some celebrity, like Madonna, or even Angelina and Brad, comes around, throwing cash willy nilly, it doesn't give certain people in the adoption racket certain ideas about what Americans are willing to pay out for babies?  Even if said celebrity means well, and donates money to an orphanage after they've adopted with a clean heart, do you honestly think that simple action is not giving people ideas about new revenue sources?  

For this bitch to claim that, by adopting a child from Malawi, she's actually paving the way for future adoptions is complete and utter bullshit.  She's simply going after what she wants.  And she'll get what she wants, which is another child, because she's got the cash in hand to get it done.  It may not be for another few years, but eventually the culture of corruption she has encouraged in Malawi with her payoffs, will screw the rest of us over.  It's not going to take long for the government in Malawi to realize this is a money-making venture.  If the government decides to open up international adoptions there, eventually, because of what she started and what the officials there will come to expect in terms of payoffs, that avenue will be closed, if not by the government of Malawi, but by the American Embassy there.  Don't believe me?  Well, that's what's happened in Guatemala, where the American Embassy has put an absolute and total embargo on facilitating the adoption of orphans by American families.  Why did they shut down this avenue?  Because there was so much money floating around, unscrupulous people in Guatemala were actually stealing infants from their parents, handing them over to an orphanage, who would then pay them a finders fee.  Supply and demand, kids.  If they start running short of actual orphans, they'll find them someplace else. It's just that simple.  The American Embassy decided it would not take part in such a shady operation, and forced the government to clean up their act.  This happened over a year ago, and to my knowledge, the government in Guatemala hasn't done a thing about it. 

When babies are simply a commodity to be bought and sold, as Madonna believes they are, instead of lives that could be better lived in another country, with another family, who simply wants to love and care for said life, it's not a "process," it's an auction.  We used to have such auctions, and the people who were auctioned off were called "slaves."  We abolished the institution of slavery because we believed it was morally wrong to place monetary value on human life; we believed it was morally wrong for a human life to be traded as a commodity.  Adoptions of this sort should be considered no different in this regard.  Because a child who is bought with money slipped under the table is no different than a slave bought at auction a hundred and seventy years ago.  Of course people will say, but the child was in an orphanage anyway; they're getting a better life out of the deal. 

Do you realize that that was precisely the same argument slavers in past centuries used to justify the taking of people from their homes, shackling them, and selling them to the highest bidder?