This article by Simon Hooper at CNN.com brings up some interesting issues in the debate over the value of celebrity adoptions of 3rd world children.
In the wake of Madonna's recent efforts to adopt a 13 month old boy from Malawi, one of the least developed and AIDS stricken countries in Africa and all of the world, I can't help but question the motives of celebrity adopters. I can't doubt that they love the adopted children and provide nourishment and care that far exceeds the type of treatment that the kids could've received in their homelands, but doesn't this growing trend seem more and more like an effort to get positive press, bolster a global image, and appear like a major player in the fight against global poverty? It seems to me like these children are taking on the role of glorified accessories, as sorts of living status symbols.
If celebrities were truly interested in fighting poverty, wouldn't it make more sense for them to donate large sums of money that could, if managed properly (which in and of itself is a tough task), possibly save thousands of impoverished, malnourished children instead of only 1?
Any thoughts?
17 October 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Here's my satirical take on all of these celebrity adoptions: Stiff Penalties To Protect Malawi's Childlife.
Post a Comment