Pitt Wants to Adopt Jolie's Two Children

[chersolly]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051203/...NlYwN5bmNhdA--

Cool!

[Guava~Lush]

Why does this bother me?

Its not like I really care, but Brangelina isnt going to last that long. If he wants kids he should adopt his own.
His divorce isnt even that cold yet.


ick.

[Attila the Honey]

Originally Posted by Guava~Lush

Why does this bother me?

Its not like I really care, but Brangelina isnt going to last that long. If he wants kids he should adopt his own.
His divorce isnt even that cold yet.


ick.

I agree.

Angelina seems very impulsive to me. Not that I know her at all, but that is my impression. Honestly, I am shocked they are still together.

[wednesday]

Originally Posted by Guava~Lush

His divorce isnt even that cold yet.

The article says he and Aniston separated in January and the divorce was final in October. FWIW, I met my DH when he had been separated about two months, moved in together about 4 months later, and were married about three months after his divorce was final. It's been 5 years now. Some things are just meant to be.

[LovemyBoo]

I really hope this works out for them. At least if he adopts them, should Brad and Angelina break up Maddox and Zahara will still have a father. Brad seems to take the responsibility seriously (yeah, I'm looking at you, K-Fed ) and I don't think he'd abandon them if it doesn't work out with Angie.

Tom Hanks left his wife AND children for Rita Wilson. And when I say left the children, I don't mean literally as in abandonment, I mean there were children involved.

Paul Newman left his wife and children for Joanne Woodward.

Sting and Trudie Styler left spouses and children for each other.

Steven Spielberg left his wife and child for Kate Capshaw.

Robin Williams left his wife and children for the nanny, they've been together at least 10 years now.

Christopher Reeve hooked up with Dana Reeve before the ink on his divorce papers was dry.

My point is that some of hollywoods most enduring and favorite relationships started on terms very similar to Brad and Angie. Now I'm not saying that they will be on that list someday, though I hope they are. I'm just saying let's not automatically assume that the relationship is doomed to fail due to the way it started.

[AdinaL]

I don't know the whole story, as I don't know them personally, but truthfully, how can having someone else wanting to love on babies be bad?

Good for him, good for them.

[Debstmomy]

Are they even married? Seems to me that they should be married, before he tries to adopt them.

[thismama]

Huh.

I don't think he should adopt them... seems to me he hasn't known them that long, and I assume his interest in them is via his interest in their mother.

I don't get the comments about ppl leaving spouses *and children* for other spouses. Unless we know the ppl stopped caring for and spending time with their children when they left their spouses (which happens regularly yes, but is not a default assumption).

And why should he marry Angelina to adopt the children?

This is very heterosexist nuclear family paradigm IMO.

[Debstmomy]

Originally Posted by thismama

And why should he marry Angelina to adopt the children?

This is very heterosexist nuclear family paradigm IMO.

I will assume this was directed at me. I say this only for legality reasons. Why would he want rights to these kids, but not yet make a commitment to their mother. If I were Angelina, I would want that answer first. Perhaps she no longer believes in marriage, but if I were her, I would not sign legal rights to my kids to a "boyfriend". Just seems wierd to me. I guess if they had been together for years, instead of months, I might feel differently.

I could care less if it was Angelina & Bradgelica or Angelo & Brad. For me what is lacking it the legal commitment to each other. Seems to me that should come first, before adopting her children. That's all.

[PhoenixEternal]

Originally Posted by thismama

And why should he marry Angelina to adopt the children?

This is very heterosexist nuclear family paradigm IMO.

Yeah that. It weirds me out.

I'm also madly in love with Angelina...so that MAY have something to do with it.

PE

[PrettyBird]

I also think it's kind of risky to give someone rights to your children that you have only been seeing a few months. Is it really in the best interest of the children? That is the only thing that matters here. He can love on them, spend time with them, and get to know them without becoming their legal father so quickly. I don't think legal marriage is is the important thing, but a long term committment is. Think about it, if you became a single parent, would you give your boyfriend of only a few months equal rights to your children? I sure as hell wouldn't!!

[thismama]

Originally Posted by PrettyBird

I also think it's kind of risky to give someone rights to your children that you have only been seeing a few months. Is it really in the best interest of the children? That is the only thing that matters here. He can love on them, spend time with them, and get to know them without becoming their legal father so quickly. I don't think legal marriage is is the important thing, but a long term committment is.

I agree very much with this.

[LovemyBoo]

Originally Posted by thismama

Huh.

I don't get the comments about ppl leaving spouses *and children* for other spouses. Unless we know the ppl stopped caring for and spending time with their children when they left their spouses (which happens regularly yes, but is not a default assumption).

Since that's likely directed at me, allow me to quote myself.

Originally Posted by LovemyBoo

And when I say left the children, I don't mean literally as in abandonment, I mean there were children involved.

Thank you.

I admit it seems sudden. There's no way for any of us to know what's in their minds and hearts. They both seem like decent people to me. I'm hoping for the best. That said I'll be pleasantly surprised if they're still together in 20 years. Pleasantly, but surprised nonetheless.

[annakiss]

I guess I sort of see his wanting to adopt her children as a much bigger gesture towards commitment than marriage, especially considering these individuals' past marriages. Angelina adopted Maddox while married to Billy Bob, who did not participate in the adoption.

eta - I think it's a win-win situation. The kids get a dad. What's bad about that?

[thismama]

Originally Posted by LovemyBoo

And when I say left the children, I don't mean literally as in abandonment, I mean there were children involved.

But this is my point. If the parent didn't abandon the children, why say they left the children just because the relationship between the parents dissolved? If ppl leave their partners they are also by default leaving their children?

Originally Posted by annakiss

I think it's a win-win situation. The kids get a dad. What's bad about that?

Well, but what sort of a dad? A dad in name for good pr or because he wants to impress the mama he's been dating for a few months is not better than no dad IMO.

[annakiss]

Originally Posted by thismama

Well, but what sort of a dad? A dad in name for good pr or because he wants to impress the mama he's been dating for a few months is not better than no dad IMO.

I see your point. I guess because it's such a huge, important, serious gesture, I take it for more than that. Hope fully the courts will really do their jobs and make certain he's serious.

[LovemyBoo]

People, in general, seem to be more forgiving of divorces if no children are involved. If Brad and Jen had children and he still left for Angie, there would be much more outrage toward him, I have little doubt. I just wanted to point out that some of Hollywood's most beloved men (esp. Tom Hanks and Paul Newman) did have children when they left their marriages, making them worse than Brad in the eyes of some. And yet, somehow, their new marriages are now held up as proof that hollywood marriages can work. FTR I love both of those couples and feel that sometimes it takes the 2nd time or more to get it right.

I'm sorry I worded it poorly. THAT'S why I made an effort to explain exactly what I meant in my OP. Guess that wasn't enough.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by annakiss

I see your point. I guess because it's such a huge, important, serious gesture, I take it for more than that. Hope fully the courts will really do their jobs and make certain he's serious.

Yeah, well I think the more parents the merrier if he means it, and if he plans to actively parent the children.

I just tend to assume Hollywood people do *everything* for pr value. And I think if that's the reason here, it's pretty low. I'm cynical.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by LovemyBoo

People, in general, seem to be more forgiving of divorces if no children are involved. If Brad and Jen had children and he still left for Angie, there would be much more outrage toward him, I have little doubt. I just wanted to point out that some of Hollywood's most beloved men (esp. Tom Hanks and Paul Newman) did have children when they left their marriages, making them worse than Brad in the eyes of some. And yet, somehow, their new marriages are now held up as proof that hollywood marriages can work. FTR I love both of those couples and feel that sometimes it takes the 2nd time or more to get it right.

I'm sorry I worded it poorly. THAT'S why I made an effort to explain exactly what I meant in my OP. Guess that wasn't enough.

I guess my point is why the assumption from some posters on this thread that a man adopting the children of a woman he is interested in is automatically a good thing. And why does romantic love between two adults equal adoption of the children of one of the adults by the other?

If he is really wanting to parent and has absolutely fallen in love with these children as he has grown to know them, apart from his relationship with their mother... cool.

But as a gesture of love for the mama, or whatever... it just kind of squicks me out.

[1xmom]

When I first heard about Brad wanting to adopt the kids the first thing that went through my mind is "Good for them". But now after reading these posts I'm kind of wondering. Not if they are doing it for the sake of pr, b/c for some reason I do believe Brad genuinely cares for these children and wants to be a part of their life. I do love seeing him with the children.
BUT, otoh, if they were the average couple and not big time celebrities would we be quicker to judge. B/c realistically I am a single mother and if I met someone, he is going to have to really commit to me before I allow him to adopt my child. I really don't think I would allow my "boyfriend" of only a few months adopt my children.
I did read somewhere else that she was contemplating having children of her own since he would like some bio children. Anyone hear of this?