kids

Elton John + David Furnish Turn to Celebrity Baby Adoption HQ: Africa

eltonbaby2

Rebuffed by the Ukraine for being too old and HIV-y, Elton John and David Furnish are taking their child hunt to Africa. In fact, they already found a kid they liked, but when they realized the boy still had living relatives, they moved on — unlike Madonna, who steals children from parents who don’t want them. Meanwhile, back in the Ukraine, The Sun tracked down the (alcoholic!) mother of Baby Lev, Marina, who says she’ll never give the pop star her kid. That’s funny, because the state won’t give Marina her kids either: she doesn’t have custody of her children.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #entertainment #adoption #celebs/celebrities stories and more

7 Comments

  • sekaiichibankawaii

    Seriously, celebs need to start adopting children in their own countries. If you want a black child, you can get plenty of them in the US/UK.

  • Fitz

    I don’t really have a problem with international adoption. It’s not like they swoop in like crows and take the babies.. these are pretty poorly neglected kids, etc. What is problematic for me is the vanity-inspired attempts to adopt at 62, with no history with children, a history of drug and alcohol problems, etc. If you are a gay man who wants to be a dad, do it at a reasonable age.

  • Cam

    Elton said that gays were stupid to be advocating for full marriage, that a civil partnership was just as good, yet he was denied the first child, the excuse given was that they didn’t have a full marriage under British law.

    I feel bad that the child will be forced to stay in the orphanage, however, maybe some of these entitled celebs that live insulated lives should think before they speak. Elton, your civil partnership was fine for you because you can spend millions to have lawyers open the doors that aren’t already opened to you because of your fame. But many of us…you know, would kind of like to be considered equal under the law thank you very much.

  • Tommy

    Cam, the reason the Ukraine wouldn’t let him adopt was because he was gay. Even if he got married in a place that allows it like some states in the US and Spain, he wouldn’t be able to adopt there because they don’t recognize gay marriages from other countries. To the people in the Ukraine, marriage means only a man and a woman. It wouldn’t have mattered to them if British law did allow gay marriages because they hate gay people in the Ukraine and don’t recognize gay marriage there.
    In England, under civil partnerships you have all the same rights as marriage couples. The only legal difference is the name.

  • Cam

    @No. 4 · Tommy You said
    Cam, the reason the Ukraine wouldn’t let him adopt was because he was gay. Even if he got married in a place that allows it like some states in the US and Spain, he wouldn’t be able to adopt there because they don’t recognize gay marriages from other countries.
    _______________________________________________________

    That may all be well and good…but the fact that a British civil partnership is held out as different gave the Ukraine the cover they needed to discriminate against gays by claiming a difference. If they were merely married the Ukraine would have been forced to say either yes or no, and not be able to pass it off as some sort of Bureocratic B.S.

  • QueerToday

    The research is in – open, domestic adoption is best for youth.

  • Fitz

    #6, and which research is that? Do you have a citation? Domestic adoption is great for babies born into wealthy areas. not so hot for those others.

    I sincerely doubt that Elton John could pass a Home Study. Who, in their right mind, would give a baby to a 62 y/o drug addict with no child raring history and is prone to throwing tantrums? You can look for the boogieman of homophobia, but this might be about child advocacy.

Comments are closed.