I guess her money didn't talk this time...for now anyway. She managed to adopt David last time and she didn't reside in the country for 18 months leading up to that adoption, so something tells me things may still work out in her favour. She shoulda waited on that adoption party.

wow. madonna shut down? something tells me that she will win out in the end anyway. i mean, it's madonna.

Madonna is too old to adopt another little baby. And now she's a single mother. She needs to concentrate on the children she already has.

It's pretty sick how people are having a great time laughing at Madonna over this, when surely the child in question would have a much better chance at a future living in her family with all the advantages it would give.

Yeah, I bet there are millions of average people just lined up, waiting to adopt Malawi orphans and totally willing to also live in the country for 18-24 months.

I'm no Madonna fan, but give me a break. This is not something to gloat over.

I agree with you princess-eab. This child could have a way better life with Madona than with anyone else, Malwi needs to realized that its adoption rules are ridiculous and all the things that Madonna have done for that country, they just took away that little girl chance to live a better life.I hope that she appeals and that she can adopt her. Stupid judge.

I have mixed emotions about this. She shouldn't get any special treatment just because she's Madonna. However, I'm sure she can provide that little girl with a much better life. I'm sure she's not used to not getting her way, so I would be shocked if she doesn't appeal.

i can understand that there are 'rules' to adoption, but if they bent the rules for david then you can see why she would go the same route for mercy. i think that it's a shame when you know that things will be better off for the child with Madonna. when she'll have medical care and education and all sorts of benefits and comforts of life with madonna, and instead the courts aren't allowing it. i don't know - i think that it's going to be an interesting couple of weeks.

i'm glad she didn't get the kid. I don't understand all these celebrities adopting kids from other countries. why not take care of the kids that are abandoned here in the US!

As harsh as it sounds, I think she should take her money and efforts elsewhere... why can the Malawian government take all her charitable efforts and publicity, but not let her adopt a child? It's so not fair. They waived the residency requirement before... why not now? I'm not saying she should be able to "buy" a child and skip the law, but c'mon, she has tried to do a lot for those people. They are very stubborn and stupid if they don't want a child to have a better life, which undoubtedly she would.

^agreed. the government is corrupt, making their own bed and lying in it. it's too bad the kids have to suffer...

first off there are many normal folks out there wanting kids and waiting years and years to adopt them, they put in a lot of money and do whatever it takes and then hopefully get their baby. Madonna waltzed in the first time and got David just like that and it caused quite a big stink, why should she get special treatment? Second her personal life is a mess, divorced, dating someone who is young enough to be her oldest child, an alleged affair with A-rod and then in the midst of all this she decides to get another baby? If she wants her so bad then she should abide by the ruling, let's see how that works out.

why does she need a Malawi baby? there are plenty of babies in need. take your money and go elsewhere. oh, and I don't know about the claim that the baby will be better off with Madonna than in Malawi. Fame does terrible things to people. . .let's wait til her kids are adults and see how they turn out.

@Haethre... how about at least having an education and medical care? Regardless of her fame, the child will have a much better shot in life than being left in an orphanage in Malawi!

This probably isn't the end of it, but it's not a surprise that a different judge chose to uphold the law. I would not be surprised if they start scrutinizing the schools she's building, as they are there to evangelize Kabbalism. Food and shelter should not come with such strings attached.

witchbaby, I totally agree. This trendy adopting foreign children is annoying. There are thousands of children in the foster care system here in the US that desperately need lovoing homes and families. Why are they not good enough for these celebrities or anyone else who adopts foreigners?

I am glad she was denied, there are rules and that was what the judgement is based on, just because she has money and celebrity doesnt mean that the rules are to be ignored.

NO ONE can say that Mercy is better off with her than at home. Money doesnt give love, and we have no idea what kind of parent she is.

Really? You can honestly say that she's better off being in a freaking ORPHANAGE in an underdeveloped country? Money doesn't buy love, that's true, but it buys you a CHANCE. A CHANCE of not dying by the age of five... a CHANCE of an education and a future.... I don't care WHO it is, I'm not a Madonna fan by any stretch, but she is trying to do something GOOD here, people.
The "rules" of their government are obviously NOT set in stone if they let her adopt before.. to me it sounds like they are essentially blackmailing Madonna for more money. Sorry, they sound like a corrupt government to me.

Like many people have said, it's nice to see a celebrity having to play by the same rules as everyone else, but at the same time, because of her the money her celebrity has given her, she could give that child a much better life.

One year ago, my husband and I started the adoption process. We spent months proving to our agency that we are fit to be parents. We had every minute detail of our lives scrutinized by other people. We had to have extensive medical exams, lay out all of our finances, have references, etc. Once they approved all of that, we started on the requirements for the country that we are adopting from: China.

Like Malawi and every other country involved in international adoption, China has it's own rules: both adopting parents have to be over 30, no singles can adopt and you have to have been married for 3 years (5 if it's your second marriage), Etc.

They do this because they want to make sure they are placing the children in strong, stable homes. Sure, things go wrong down the road after the adoption is completed, but at the time, they want to make sure the kids will be well taken care of.

To princess_eab and totygoliguez, you're right...we shouldn't be laughing at Madonna...but, as a person who does not and cannot have children and will never get special treatment for the amount of money I make or the fame I have...it's hard to watch these celebrities walk in and not have to follow the rules that the rest of us have to follow. My husband and I will be waiting at least 2 years to be matched with a baby girl from China.

To Witchbaby and Fleurfairy...There are almost no words. First of all, at least for us "normal" people, the choice to adopt "these foreign babies" is not because it is trendy. My husband and I have been wanting to adopt a baby from China long before Angelina and Madonna were doing it. And you know what? It makes sense for our family. Why? Because my husband is Chinese. Because even with the long wait, the China adoption program is one of the most stable in the world. Because at the end of this long process, there will be a child.

Second of all, you obviously know nothing about adoption in the broad international context and especially about domestic adoption. Yes, there are a lot of kids here in the US that need loving homes. But most of them are in foster care because somehow there is still a parent in the picture (and being a foster parent, while incredibly admirable, is not for everyone). And there aren't that many babies available here. And it's super competitive because the birth mother chooses who she wants to parent. And at the end of all of that, here, in this country, birth parents still have rights.

Besides the fact...and I will say this to every person who spouts off the "why do you have to go to a foreign country to adopt a child when there are so many here" line: It's great that you care so much about the orphans here in the US. How is your process to adopt one of those children going?

Because at the end of the day, adoption is a very personal choice for each family. There are children here and around the world that need loving homes and families who desperately want a child. Unless you are actively involved, or plan to someday be actively involved in that process, you shouldn't be saying something so ridiculous.

But, back to the subject at hand...I think Madonna's home/life situation is a big deal. As was stated, yes, she is a single mother now, etc. I think she was premature in assuming that everything would go her way (planning a party, etc). If the Malawian gov has no problem with her life situation, and she's really wanting to adopt this child, she should have no problem doing whatever it takes to wait and do it properly.

What a bunch of idiots and savages. Madonna could have given that little girl a better life, but now she is going to suffer and probably die in an orphanage. Life in an orphanage in America is really bad, and in Malawi it's 50(x)worse. Shame on the Non governmental organizations that were critical of Madonna and her attempt to adopt that poor little girl and shame on all of you that agree and think that a child is better off in an orphanage in a third world country rather than with a person that could have given her a much better life and a chance to pursue her goals and dreams, whatever they may be.

Lawd, I deal alot with orphanages here in america and they arent "really bad" just fyi.

this is the one I work with, and its like many in our nation.

http://www.chsfl.org/

Regardless of how "great" an orphanage in America is, the point is, it's still an orphanage. Isn't having a loving parent much more desirable than being in the system?

How do we know madonna is a loving parent?

^how do you know she's not? there are millions of parents out there who abuse and mistreat their children. criticize them. it's not like any of us knows Madonna.

Lawdawg08, was it really necessasry to call
the Malawi's savages?
Surely you can make your point without insulting people
you disagree with!

tyau30 ..thank you for sharing your experience. I hope all goes well with your baby girl.

While i am not a big fan of this "trend"
of celebrities acquiring children like
the accessory of the season..
I do think that Madonna may have been thinking about David when she decided to adopt another child from Malawi.
I imagine that it would be nice for David to have someone in his (new) family that looks like him.
My best friend is Korean and she was adopted
by an american family in the Midwest..
and she says she was VERY loved by her adoptive family,
but that it would have been nice if some else in the family looked like her.

so mercy james gets to stay in the orphanage. lets catch up with her at 18 and see how her life turned out. since there isn't a line waiting to adopt kids like mercy, and her own grandmother has left her in that orphanage, i'd say her future is pretty bleak. sad.

I'm very glad that Madonna did not get to adopt a second child from Malawi.
My husband is from Lilongwe, Malawi exactly where Modonna was trying to adopt from. Do you know that we would not be able to adopt a child from Malawi. If you do not live in Malawi it's illegal to adopt a child from Malawi! She should not have been allowed to adopt from there in the first place and people from Malawi are upset about this. She could go to other countries and adopt legally and I would have no problems with this.
If Malawi is a country that she wants to help than help, you don't have to break that country's laws to do it.
Just to make it clear I am not against her adopting, I'm adopted, she should go somewhere, where it's legal!

oh please: respect every country law. Ifthey say nO its nO. If u want to appeal then go and do it and explain the reaons why you think they are decision is not right. If they hear you the final decision is fatal: they wheter let you go with the child dor you just live the country. By the way this adopting stuff is becoming a trend: nowadays celecrities dat do not want scars of pregnancy just get up and adopt. I mean see how many celebrities now dat want to adopt. Please you shouldnt do that because you want people to think thta you care, you should do it because you actually care. They are some who do care and some who do not. They just following the trend.
Madonna is nobody: shes rich ok and can provide a good life to that little gir. The rule is the rule. No exception for her. She shud just do what evry citizen will do: go for an appeal and respect the final decision.. Malawi govt has the right to say watever it wants: thats justice: sometimes its fair, and sometimes its not.

To everyone who says "the rule is the rule"... she adopted David from exactly the same place. If they had said "No" to her the first time, I would fully understand.... they didn't. They let her "bend" the rules the first time. Obviously their "laws" are made up as they go along.

How sad for that little girl. I would understand this if they thought Madonna was abusing the kids, or ignoring them or other some such, but all you have to do is look at Lourdes and David and see that she takes great care of her kids.

I mean, I can't STAND Madonna but the reasons this judge gave for not allowing the adoption are detrimental to the CHILD regardless of who Madonna is. I despise ANY celebrity that adopts publicly like this. I mean, look at all of them that have adopted under the radar, the ones where you only found out AFTER everything was final and they were home. I have a hard time believing that any celebrity couldn't find a way to do these adoptions quietly.

Spiderlove - Their laws are not made up as they go along. As I said in a previous comment, my husband is from Malawi, and he was very surprised that they let her adopt in the first place, because they've never let anyone adopt outside of the country and that's the law. Because you break the law once it's ok to do so again?

I don't understand why the Malawian gov. has that requirement where you have to live there for 18-24 months. That seems like a steep requirement and would make it very hard to get their children adopted.

Obviosly mainly well off people can adopt, so if they set these rules, that you have to live there for 18-24 months, you bring in a lot of money to their country, that may be a reason for that.

i'm glad she didn't get the kid. I don't understand all these celebrities adopting kids from other countries. why not take care of the kids that are abandoned here in the US!

---------------------------------------------------------

Because children in the US are more worthy to be taken care of then children from other countries? Why is the child's origins is so important to you guys?

If they were such an upstanding and credible government, Curlywhirl, they wouldn't have let her adopt David in the first place. Which, as I've said, if she was denied the first time, I could wholeheartedly understand. But they didn't deny her. They took her money and her charity and her publicity and gave her the child. Now all of a sudden she must obey their arbitrary rules and laws? That's making it up as you go along, isn't it?
And she did NOT break the law, btw. The GOVERNMENT allowed her to adopt David, THEY changed/broke their own laws. Why should she be accountable for that?

The Malawian court is very stupid. This child would be much better with Madonna. Shes taking good care of David, he looks healthy and happy.

So if I adopt and I do not want to adopt in America that is NOBODY"S business. A child is a child. That is what she wants.

Did anyone know that Malawi officials reported that Madonna supports 25,000 orphans in Malawi????

That is rather impressive.

I still do not understand how anyone thinks Madonna is undeserving.

So if I adopt and I do not want to adopt in America that is NOBODY"S business. A child is a child. That is what she wants.

Did anyone know that Malawi officials reported that Madonna supports 25,000 orphans in Malawi????

That is rather impressive.

I still do not understand how anyone thinks Madonna is undeserving.

BTW-
I think they are just trying to get more money out of her because this really makes no sense, if they excused the 18 month rule for David, and she has since done A LOT for the country, something is fishy here

different judge different ruling. Maybe this one didnt want to take the bribes and look the other way.

Just FYI,

"Gucci is throwing an all-star fundraiser on Feb. 6 for Madonna’s charity, Raising Malawi. GUCCI's "A Night to Benefit Raising Malawi and UNICEF" will take place in heated tents on the north lawn of the United Nations, with special co-hosts Sarah Jessica Parker and Salma Hayek scheduled to attend along with Madonna.

However, neither Gucci nor UNICEF is aware — even though it’s been noted here many times — that Raising Malawi is merely a front for Philip Berg’s Kabbalah Center of Los Angeles

In fact, before anyone writes a check: Raising Malawi is also still not a registered charity. All of its forms, filings and press releases direct back to the Kabbalah Center.

Berg’s son Michael started Raising Malawi under the pretext of helping orphans in that impoverished country. But after Madonna helped herself to one, David Banda, Berg and the rest of the Kabbalah/Raising Malawi team went to work on their real cause: indoctrinating unsuspecting Malawi orphans into their brand of mysticism.

According to Berg’s blog from April 24, 2006, his first move was to bring Malawi teachers to Los Angeles to retrofit them for Kabbalah. He wrote:

"We have brought a number of teachers from the African nation of Malawi to Los Angeles. This is part of our Raising Malawi initiative. They will be learning the Spirituality for Kids curriculum for the next 3 months. After that, they will go back to Malawi and teach the children there these empowering spiritual life lessons. I am very excited about this project. This morning we welcomed them to the Centre."

Spirituality for Kids, of course, is to Kabbalah what Delphi is to Scientology: its curriculum. Certainly, Gucci doesn’t have to raise money for this group. According to its most recent tax filing, Spirituality for Kids had gross receipts in 2005-2006 of over $25 million. Its listed net assets came to $15.7 million.

THIS IS WHY I DONT TRUST THE WOMAN. Its all ABOUT HER.

she "supports" orphans, but only if they are taught Kabbalah.

to the idiot who called malawians savages, open mouth remove foot, don't say ignorant sh!t like that.

@Caterpillargirl... how is ANY different from ANY other organization that goes down to Africa to "help"? I just googled Malawi and one of the first pages to come up was a site called Y-Malawi... here's THEIR excerpt:
Y-Malawi is a groundbreaking model for partnership between a growing number of churches in the US and frontline Christian organizations in Malawi, Africa. Together we provide community-wide, sustainable development and transformation in the areas of water and food security, healthcare, education, evangelism & discipleship, youth programs, and economic development, including micro-finance.

Explain to me the difference, please. I'd love to hear it.

Here's the direct link: http://www.y-malawi.org/

Okay spider, but cut the snark a bit please, the difference is that the christian organizations, and other organized charities dont require the children to become christians, or buddhists, or muslims, or mormans, or catholics, to learn strictly thier ways and teachings. They dont take the teachers from the schools send them to a Christian learning center and indoctrinate them in christian ways and make them teach it to the children.
Madonnas "charity" isnt registered either, so that means that no one is overseeing the details.
Thats the difference.

just because she is rich she can´t go to a poor country to buy a baby breaking all the rules about adoption in that country. And to be rich doesn´t make you always happy.

It's no more appropriate for Christian evangelics to proselytize as part of the aid package than Kabalists or any other religion. If you want to give food, water, medical care, etc to people in need, it should be at face value, and not require that they abandon their own religion or culture.

This is the reason some countries don't want church groups bringing aid.