If you go to cnn.com, or any other website that has celebrity news, you may have heard that actress Mariska Hargitay was in the news this past week, just completing her second adoption. I usually don’t click on celebrity baby news, but since it was an adoption, my interest threshold was passed.
Their first adoption took over a year, so they submitted their paperwork again this summer. This is quite common for adoptive parents, your home study expires after two years, so if you wait and submit your application after that two year period, you get to go through it again. The other common thing is that the unexpected happened, and their application was selected just days after submitting it. I imagine if it was me, I’d be a bit worried about having two kids that young so close. Why didn’t this one take a year as well!
The pictures will be in this week’s People magazine if you like baby pictures, or you can view the article. I made a mistake though. I started to read the comment section. Comment sections are interesting. In blogs like ours, comments are usually thoughtful, helpful, supportive, providing of other viewpoints, clean and respectful. Comment sections of big sites like cnn.com, people.com, etc. are filled with hateful, idiotic, off topic, complaining and just plain mean comments. Just today, I was reading an article on Rupert Murdoch’s News of the World paying off the victims of the wiretapping scandal. It took all of 4 comments before it delved into a debate on Obama’s reelection chances, and a contest to see how many ways they can call the other side stupid for not thinking the same way.
Articles and posts almost need three sections, Rants, Supports and Civilized Back and Forth. The Hargitay article consisted of mostly Supports, which are nice. I don’t know if they are helpful, because they appear on the author’s article, but maybe Mariska has time juggling two babies and a career to read the comments. Then the comments strayed to a point in-between Rant and Civilized Back and Forth. The topic, whether or not celebrity was a part of the reason she was selected so quickly.
Nothing in the story would be all that unusual. It wouldn’t be unusual to happen to a couple like us. The agency claims to have hidden her celebrity, which I have no reason to not believe, but am vastly interested on how you accomplish that. This is Mari, and she works sex crimes one hour a week.* That’s no good, she works in television. Maybe?
* If you don’t know who Mariska Hargitay is, she’s an actress on Law and Order : SVU on NBC.
Regardless, is it a problem if her celebrity did help? Adoptive parents are selected for a number of reasons. One couple we knew were selected because they had a picture of a horse in their profile book. Another couple may be selected for their financial means. It’s all subjective. If you were the birth parent, and knowing that if you let her adopt your child, and that he’ll have all sorts of opportunities in life that you wouldn’t be able to provide, wouldn’t you at least like the choice?
The issue I imagine is one of fairness. If I’ve had my profile book in for 7 months, and she’s selected in just days because of her celebrity status, I’m mad. Of course I’m mad if anyone passes us by. Catholic Social Services tries to make it fair by only displaying a certain number of profiles, and thus your profile will be queued until those in front of you are selected. This works for them. I kind of liken it to not being able to marry until your older sister does.
The comments went back and forth, as they do. In general, the comments were good. Of course, they aren’t as good as the commenters of this blog. They are the best in the world!