Adopting newborn at 52 years old?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hoda is 52....??!

Wow she looks 35!

Just based on that fact alone then I think adopting a child for her is doable.

Didn't Madonna just adopt two four yr old twins as a single mom?
She is like fifty eight.

Twins=two so therefore you are saying she adopting four, not two. I know it total she adopted four but, you don't need to say two when saying twins. So annoying when people make this mistake.

PP didn't say anything incorrectly.

PP should’ve said, “Didn’t Madonna adopt four-year-old twins?”

Twins indicates two siblings. Saying two twins is just wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in the system and let me tell you, I'd have loved to have been adopted by anyone at any age just to get out! I was in the system when the only way a single woman (I never knew of any single men adopting) could adopt alone was if she was rich. And then the rich women (and couples) adopting always went for the babies or those under 2 or 3.

There's no feeling quite like the one when you're 17.5, nearing aging out, and realizing you have no one. You have nothing. Totally alone and about to be abandoned again, but this time by the system that "took care of you."

I know so many gay & lesbian couples in their 70s and older now who would have loved to have adopted kids years ago but weren't allowed. It's disgusting that people with love to give weren't allowed in favor of "nuclear traditional families."

Children age out of foster everyday
Most states have post foster care programs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good for her. She seems like she'd make a great mother.

When?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She looks like she is in great health, probably has financial stability/to great wealth. George Clooney is 55. Are you questioning his ability to parent twins??

She had breast cancer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well seeing that in almost all domestic open adoptions these days, the BIRTH MOTHER gets to choose the adoptive parents and make a plan for her baby, I don't think anybody else gets to have an opinion on it. For her own reasons (maybe her own parents were really young, she wants a mature parent, maybe her parents were in a dysfunctional or abusive relationships and she thinks a single parent is better, maybe she and Hoda like the same ice cream flavor, who knows?), the birth parent chose Hoda to be the adoptive mother. That's her right as the birth mother. What anyone else thinks doesn't matter.

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hoda is 52....??!

Wow she looks 35!

Just based on that fact alone then I think adopting a child for her is doable.

Didn't Madonna just adopt two four yr old twins as a single mom?
She is like fifty eight.

Twins=two so therefore you are saying she adopting four, not two. I know it total she adopted four but, you don't need to say two when saying twins. So annoying when people make this mistake.

PP didn't say anything incorrectly.

PP should’ve said, “Didn’t Madonna adopt four-year-old twins?”

Twins indicates two siblings. Saying two twins is just wrong.

Could you be any more tiresome?

I don’t think so!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually had to turn it off when she announced this. I don’t have a problem with the age, but I do think she was able to get a newborn so quickly due to money. Also, she’s must work 60-70 hrs a week and when could she see the baby other than sleeping.

We do not know the circumstances of the adoption. However, she’s using her wealth to HELP children who could possibly be lost in the foster system and giving them a life that many children in the US could never hope to have. Most parents these days work long hours and hardly see their children, but somehow those children manage to survive. I’m sure Hoda can afford a nanny or two, or she may reduce her workload. Why would you have a problem with this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had to turn it off when she announced this. I don’t have a problem with the age, but I do think she was able to get a newborn so quickly due to money. Also, she’s must work 60-70 hrs a week and when could she see the baby other than sleeping.

We do not know the circumstances of the adoption. However, she’s using her wealth to HELP children who could possibly be lost in the foster system and giving them a life that many children in the US could never hope to have. Most parents these days work long hours and hardly see their children, but somehow those children manage to survive. I’m sure Hoda can afford a nanny or two, or she may reduce her workload. Why would you have a problem with this?

Those are very young kids. There are plenty of families available to adopt them. She will no the parenting them and she will work long hours. The issue is her age and she may not make it till their 18th birthday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had to turn it off when she announced this. I don’t have a problem with the age, but I do think she was able to get a newborn so quickly due to money. Also, she’s must work 60-70 hrs a week and when could she see the baby other than sleeping.

We do not know the circumstances of the adoption. However, she’s using her wealth to HELP children who could possibly be lost in the foster system and giving them a life that many children in the US could never hope to have. Most parents these days work long hours and hardly see their children, but somehow those children manage to survive. I’m sure Hoda can afford a nanny or two, or she may reduce her workload. Why would you have a problem with this?

Those are very young kids. There are plenty of families available to adopt them. She will no the parenting them and she will work long hours. The issue is her age and she may not make it till their 18th birthday.

How do you know there are plenty of families available to adopt them? And how do you know those families have the resources to take care of them.

There are over 440,000 children in the U.S. foster care system. They all deserve families of their own and Hoda has reached out to take care of two from birth.

Celebrate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had to turn it off when she announced this. I don’t have a problem with the age, but I do think she was able to get a newborn so quickly due to money. Also, she’s must work 60-70 hrs a week and when could she see the baby other than sleeping.

We do not know the circumstances of the adoption. However, she’s using her wealth to HELP children who could possibly be lost in the foster system and giving them a life that many children in the US could never hope to have. Most parents these days work long hours and hardly see their children, but somehow those children manage to survive. I’m sure Hoda can afford a nanny or two, or she may reduce her workload. Why would you have a problem with this?

Those are very young kids. There are plenty of families available to adopt them. She will no the parenting them and she will work long hours. The issue is her age and she may not make it till their 18th birthday.

We do not know who was available to adopt them. Perhaps she wanted the experience of raising a baby from infancy which is a normal desire. Do you have access to her work schedule? Like I said before, plenty of parents work long hours. Do you tell them that they are bad parents? Why is her age an issue? No parent has any guarantee about how long they’ll live. A child needs love and a stable home life. It’s highly likely she can provide both regardless of her age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She looks like she is in great health, probably has financial stability/to great wealth. George Clooney is 55. Are you questioning his ability to parent twins??

He's married to and having the children with a woman who is 39. If he was adopting as a single parent at 55, then yes, I would think that was a poor decision.

Poor decision for whom? Isn't the kid better off with financial security and good care during her early years? The alternative is being ahuttled between foster homes in the US or in an orphanage overseas. This complaint seems similar to those who say single parents or gay parents shouldn't adopt. I have no moral issues with that, but even if I did, I hope I would admit that having a stable home is better than no home at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She looks like she is in great health, probably has financial stability/to great wealth. George Clooney is 55. Are you questioning his ability to parent twins??

He's married to and having the children with a woman who is 39. If he was adopting as a single parent at 55, then yes, I would think that was a poor decision.

Poor decision for whom? Isn't the kid better off with financial security and good care during her early years? The alternative is being ahuttled between foster homes in the US or in an orphanage overseas. This complaint seems similar to those who say single parents or gay parents shouldn't adopt. I have no moral issues with that, but even if I did, I hope I would admit that having a stable home is better than no home at all.

DP. Seems the goal posts are always moving. I remember the threads tearing apart women like Amal who have kids at 'late' ages like 36 or 37 or 39.

She's fine. Clooney's fine. Hoda's fine.

Get a life the person who questioned their ability to effectively parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had to turn it off when she announced this. I don’t have a problem with the age, but I do think she was able to get a newborn so quickly due to money. Also, she’s must work 60-70 hrs a week and when could she see the baby other than sleeping.

We do not know the circumstances of the adoption. However, she’s using her wealth to HELP children who could possibly be lost in the foster system and giving them a life that many children in the US could never hope to have. Most parents these days work long hours and hardly see their children, but somehow those children manage to survive. I’m sure Hoda can afford a nanny or two, or she may reduce her workload. Why would you have a problem with this?

Those are very young kids. There are plenty of families available to adopt them. She will no the parenting them and she will work long hours. The issue is her age and she may not make it till their 18th birthday.

How do you know there are plenty of families available to adopt them? And how do you know those families have the resources to take care of them.

There are over 440,000 children in the U.S. foster care system. They all deserve families of their own and Hoda has reached out to take care of two from birth.

Celebrate it.

PP here and my comment about this got buried a couple pages back.

My parents were foster parents for newborn babies; they cared for them while the mother decided to go through with the adoption or not. Newborns are adopted very quickly. There is a very, very long wait (years) to adopt a newborn.

Hoda is NOT a savior. If the baby had not been adopted by her, she would have been adopted by another family. Hoda didn’t rescue this child from a lifetime of foster care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had to turn it off when she announced this. I don’t have a problem with the age, but I do think she was able to get a newborn so quickly due to money. Also, she’s must work 60-70 hrs a week and when could she see the baby other than sleeping.

We do not know the circumstances of the adoption. However, she’s using her wealth to HELP children who could possibly be lost in the foster system and giving them a life that many children in the US could never hope to have. Most parents these days work long hours and hardly see their children, but somehow those children manage to survive. I’m sure Hoda can afford a nanny or two, or she may reduce her workload. Why would you have a problem with this?

Those are very young kids. There are plenty of families available to adopt them. She will no the parenting them and she will work long hours. The issue is her age and she may not make it till their 18th birthday.

How do you know there are plenty of families available to adopt them? And how do you know those families have the resources to take care of them.

There are over 440,000 children in the U.S. foster care system. They all deserve families of their own and Hoda has reached out to take care of two from birth.

Celebrate it.

PP here and my comment about this got buried a couple pages back.

My parents were foster parents for newborn babies; they cared for them while the mother decided to go through with the adoption or not. Newborns are adopted very quickly. There is a very, very long wait (years) to adopt a newborn.

Hoda is NOT a savior. If the baby had not been adopted by her, she would have been adopted by another family. Hoda didn’t rescue this child from a lifetime of foster care.

Okay, say that's true. Why is one family more 'deserving' of a foster child than another when many kids are languishing in the system.

Hoda has the means and the love available to give those kids a fantastic life. I don't get why you think she shouldn't be able to adopt these girls that she clearly desires and loves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually had to turn it off when she announced this. I don’t have a problem with the age, but I do think she was able to get a newborn so quickly due to money. Also, she’s must work 60-70 hrs a week and when could she see the baby other than sleeping.

We do not know the circumstances of the adoption. However, she’s using her wealth to HELP children who could possibly be lost in the foster system and giving them a life that many children in the US could never hope to have. Most parents these days work long hours and hardly see their children, but somehow those children manage to survive. I’m sure Hoda can afford a nanny or two, or she may reduce her workload. Why would you have a problem with this?

Those are very young kids. There are plenty of families available to adopt them. She will no the parenting them and she will work long hours. The issue is her age and she may not make it till their 18th birthday.

How do you know there are plenty of families available to adopt them? And how do you know those families have the resources to take care of them.

There are over 440,000 children in the U.S. foster care system. They all deserve families of their own and Hoda has reached out to take care of two from birth.

Celebrate it.

PP here and my comment about this got buried a couple pages back.

My parents were foster parents for newborn babies; they cared for them while the mother decided to go through with the adoption or not. Newborns are adopted very quickly. There is a very, very long wait (years) to adopt a newborn.

Hoda is NOT a savior. If the baby had not been adopted by her, she would have been adopted by another family. Hoda didn’t rescue this child from a lifetime of foster care.

No-one is calling her a savior. She adopted a baby. If she got the baby because of her wealth, so what? This is about what is best for the baby.