Selfish Moron

Madonna recently made headlines when she adopted a 1-yr-old Malawian boy. Controversy arose when the legal review process was apparently completed in a two day time period, when it should normally take weeks to do background checks on the parents, including financial, social, and legal reviews. Of course, Malawian officials had no problem speeding up the process for PR purposes, but it does raise questions. Should we just assume that Madonna and Guy Ritchie are fit to raise an African boy just because they are rich and famous?

But here is my bigger problem - Madonna supposedly chose this boy because he is motherless - she died from complications due to his birth. But the boy is not fatherless. In fact, he spent the first year of his life with his father. His father only OK'd the adoption because he is poor and wanted his son to have the best possible life. That is noble, giving up custody of your son in order to better his life. But if Madonna really cared about the best interests of the child, why couldn't she just give his father some money, so as to improve his financial situation, thereby allowing his son to stay with him? Isn't adopting him and taking him to L.A. somewhat selfish? Wasn't there another child with no parents who was equally as deserving of being adopted?

It just seems like adopting foreign children has become "chic" in Hollywood, like purse shopping for celebrities. Angelina and her insta-family, Meg Ryan and her new child, etc. We're told it is a love of humanity, a deep desire to share fortune and help the less fortunate. But it seems to me more like purchasing a nice accessory, or like a selfish attempt at positive public relations. And I see no regard for the poor victims of the situation. Sad.