Speculation begins on whether Angelina is getting special treatment in Vietnamese adoption
by CBB correspondent Tara:
As we reported earlier this week, Angelina Jolie has filed adoption papers in Vietnam to adopt another child. In the adoption papers, she filed as a single parent even though she lives with boyfriend Brad Pitt and he is the father of her other 3 children, Maddox, Zahara and Shiloh. Tatiana Beams, an international adoption advocate says Angelina skirted a significant adoption rule by filing as a single parent. This is prompting speculation on whether or not she is getting special treatment for her celebrity status. Tatiana Beams said,
This is a clear contradiction of Vietnamese law, and such situations would not be allowed for other couples. Most co-habitating couples who try to adopt as a single parent are either turned away from agencies or face difficulties.
However, Vu Duc Long of Vietnam’s International Adoption Agency says this is just not true.
They have to follow all the procedures like any other American. They will have to work with the American side. No priority will begiven to them, that means they will be treated equally as any otherpeople.
A friend of the couple’s tells People,
The process began shortly after Shiloh was born. It has been a long process and she is now simply waiting for further information. [It] could take a long time to unfold, and while it is wonderful that people are excited about it,the news that papers have been filed is only the beginning of a verycomprehensive and detailed process.
- Posted on Mar 3, 07 at 6:37PM
- Permalink
- 15 Comments
March 3rd, 2007 at 7:33 pm
This Tatiana Beams woman hates Angelina though so anything she says about her will be negative. Angelina is technically a single parent since she ain’t married so she’s not lying about her marital status.
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:02 pm
Please note if you do a Google search on Tatiana Beams, her name only comes on in relation to Angelina Jolie and Page Six. Since she is supposed to be an adoption advocate one would think she would have other results absent of her “expert” opinion on Angelina Jolie. She does not. What this tells me is that Ms. Beams only fits the Page Six definition of the word advocate and expert.
Back on January 11th, 2007 Page Six ran what was to me a clear smear campaign against Angelina accusing her of shady adoption practices. Not only did they quote Ms. Beams but they also quoted David B. Ptasnik, Director of Americans Adopting Orphans. AAO is an actual non-profit adoption agency specializing in international adoptions. AAO is based in Seattle, WA with a branch in St. Louis, MO. Ms. Beams, has no affiliation with any adoption agencies whatsoever. Mr. Ptasnik’s quote was positive but Page Six clearly tried to twist his quote to appear negative. Well, on January 11th, I contacted Mr. Ptasnik via email and since he is a true adoption assistance provider/expert, he responded. This is what he had to say:
_____________________________
Hello Faye,
Thank you for your interest in adoption.
Please note that I defended Ms. Jolie. I stated that at the time she adopted Maddox that there was no reasonable way she could have known that there was a problem with her agency. It was clear to me that the reporter
was looking for a negative slant on the adoption and the controversy. I was glad that I was able to provide some balance to her report.
David B. Ptasnik, Director, mailto:aao@orphans.com
Americans Adopting Orphans
Providing Choice and Freedom for Your Adoption
__________________________
Please note Mr. Ptasnik says “it was clear to me that the reporter was looking for a negative slant on adoption and controversy.”
And it is clear to me Page Six is once again starting a smear campaign against Angelina Jolie and looking for controversy where there is a good chance there is none. So my next question is how much did Tatiana Beams get paid for her expert advice?
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:19 pm
I agree, she filed as a woman who is not married, and she isn’t. If the Vietnamese government doesn’t have a prolem with it–unlike the Malawaian government in Madonna’s case–why are people complaining?
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:19 pm
I agree. Angelina is single. She adopted both Mad and Z as a single. They became “Jolie-Pitts” later after Brangelina became official. This time around, it will be interesting to see how Vietnam handles it.
Whether Brangelina gets married or not, they’ll get some sort of special treatment everytime they try to adopt.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:03 pm
I love how the Tahitian Beams and many others like them can make bold statements based off of “speculation”. Give it a rest already and leave this family alone.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Tatiana Beam who is located in Seattle WA, has been on a mission to paint Angelina Jolie as a negative influence where international adoption has been concerned for nearly 5yrs now.
She’s accused her of not only being the reason Cambodia changed it’s adoption policies to more stringent ones (no evidence to that end anywhere), but also has in the past accused her of knowingly using an agency to broker the adoption of Zahara, and which turned out to have major legal issues that ended it’s existence.
David Ptasnik, who is the director of Americans Adopting Orphans has come to Angelina’s defense along with numerous others that field, as have many parents of internationally adopted children. I just recently spoke with a women who said Angelina was quite instrumental in she and her husband decision to adopt not one, but 3 Ethiopian children when domestic adoption was proving to be almost an impossibilty.
Regarding Tatiana Beams determination to find fault with Angelina Jolie, I find it interesting that o one ever seems to notice that Ms Beams serious accusations are never covered by a reputable publication.
This is the second time she’s been quoted in Page Six, need I say more.
She’s gone on to say that quote “Angelina is not a hero in the international adoption community,” and I reiterate that in my research, Agnelina Jolie is quite highly thought of if for no other reason than helping to remove the stigma, and by helping to show that there are many countries full of children in need of loving homes and familys.
I think it’s time that Tatiana Beams credibility be challenged as she insists on speaking for the whole.
Last year she attempted to criticize Angelina Jolie about what later was revealed to be a negative revision of an interview regarding Madonna’s adoption of the young child from Malawi, but ironically Ms Beam had little to say during the criticizim of the singer when nearly every other child advocacy and or adoption agency in the world was coming down on her.
This really has my goat not because of Angelina, but because this person named Tatitana Beam who’s supposed to be helping but is hurting when prospective parents read not about Angelina and Madonna, but about the drama that gets created not by them, but by inept, attention seeking and jealous people who don’t have the childrens best interest at heart no matter what they say. It’s becoming quite clear that this is a persnal issue for Ms Beam and that the tabliod press knows it, and for that reason she is the one they seek out when they need to spice up a story that really is straight forward. It’s biased and incorrect, and I wish blogs would do more investigating before they decide that there’s merit, and especially those that aren’t run of the mill gossip outlets.
March 3rd, 2007 at 10:19 pm
Angelina is not my Fav! I dont like her much. But Even if she is trying to file as a single parent. Leave her alone! I mean, it’s visible that she will not be the only one raising the child. Like someone said..their not married. So… I see no problems filing as a single parent. She is always in the public eye. So I doubt she is one of those stupid Celebs who Botch things up. I think she has it under Control.:)
March 4th, 2007 at 12:32 am
Who cares? So one child gets to leave Vietnam a little early? Why anyone would be up in arms over that is beyond me. Adoption agencies can’t speed up the process for EVERYONE, but if one celeb slips through a little faster I could care less, all it is is one child going home just a bit sooner. It is a blessing not something to him and haw about. Seriously, worse things in this world. I’d think the process might go faster merely because she has such a public life, people know what she’s about, she has 2 adopted children who are clearly happy and healthy. God bless Angelina.
March 4th, 2007 at 9:59 am
**sigh** The fact is, legally, Angelina is indeed unmarried. Adoption regulations are very strict: you file according to your legal marital status. Where foreign adoption is concerned two unmarried people — no matter how committed to one another they are — cannot file to adopt jointly. They cannot. Once the child is adopted and brought to the US, then the second parent can do a “second parent adoption” within the US. But that’s only if they live in (or claim residency in) a state where that’s possible. Presumably Brad will do this, as he did (is doing?) with Madddox and Zahara.
Furthermore, with foreign adoptions, there is still the American side to the adoption: homestudies, forms, criminal background checks, finger printing, etc etc. Angelina isn’t taking any shortcuts. Legally, she cannot. Whoever their American adoption agency is, they know full well that Angelina is adopting as a legally single woman who has a live-in partner.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
How can anyone say that she is single! She and Brad are clearly in a relationship where they both live and are raising a family together.
For her to file as a single person is ridiculous. I hope that she does not get preferential treatment just because of who she is.
There are people in this world who do not yet have children and who are waiting to adpot and are rigorously checked and have to wait months, sometimes years before they can officially adpot a child. She should be treated as these are and have to wait and be checked properly.
Her and Brad have been living together for quite a while now and would, in some countries be seen as common law husband and wife.
As for them (her) adopting again, I personally feel that they should concentrate on the children that they have for a while before adding another child to the equation.
A child is for life, not just for press coverage!
March 4th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
I don’t see how Angelina Jolie filing as a single person is ridiculous. She is single by the definition of United States law (State law) and Vietnamese law. Bob and Bruce down the street from me are raising a family and they (each) under State law are unmarried, thus single.
I think what people are forgetting is that your own particular definition of the words single and unmarried don’t count. Only the definition of the law does and the law considers Angelina Jolie single. If you have a problem with the law then lobby to change it.
Lastly Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt don’t need to adopt a child in order to receive press coverage. Each sneezes and it makes CNN. So the idea of adopting a child, a lifetime commitment, for the sake of publicity, to me is a ridiculous argument.
March 4th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
Michelle, I’m sure both Angelina and Brad know adopting a child is for life–as in saving a life, like Ang did for Zahara, who was very sick when she was able to bring her home. Nothing in the way they parent has given me the impression they don’t take this very, very seriously or that they don’t intend for it to be a lifetime committment.
March 4th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Michelle:
How wrong could you be in this instance? You are totally out in left field! FYI, common-law marriages are only legal in the following countries: Australia, Canada (and not in all provinces), Scotland, and Israel, and in the following US states: Alabama, Colorado, Washington, DC, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Rhoda Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah. Also, in case you were wondering, California hasn’t recognized common-law marriage since the late 1890’s, and Louisiana has NEVER recognized common-law. In the United States, legal status is the only thing that matters. Angelina is not breaking any laws by filing to adopt as single. She IS single, legally. She would be filing falsely if she said that she and Brad were married.
Also, when was the last time Angelina used her children as “press coverage”???? If you’ll recall, she has been involved with UNICEF and various UN works since before she adopted Maddox, and does everything she can to limit her childrens’ exposure to the press. Oh, wait. What about selling the photos of a newborn Shiloh to People and OK Magazine, right? Funny. It seems things were so bad publicity-wise before the baby was born that they went to Namibia to try to avoid all the press. Then they took control over their daughter’s exposure to the press, and protected their family from being stalked and hounded day and night by releasing their own story, and using the money to help the charities and organizations Angelina has traveled and worked tirelessly to support. I’m sorry, but I don’t see Madonna putting herself in danger to visit Cambodia, Chad, or any of the other countries Angelina has traveled to and helped bring awareness to.
March 4th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
I love Angelina and Brad, people may envie that they have power, money, visibility and looks but they are using it for good. they could be doing a lot worse with it.
They have stated their intention of adopting quite a few children and to me it looks like they’re doing a pretty good job at raising them and making them their priority.
There will be plenty of children left to adopt in this world, even after Angelina Jolie has adopted 10. Don’t begrudge their happiness or their fortune, it makes you look mean and silly. If you wanted to make it a mission in your life to adopt many many children or just simply have a big family, i’m sure you could do that too.
March 4th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
You know, I’m getting really tired of people saying “omg it’s so unfair that celebs get special treatment when they’re adopting!” The way I see it is no matter how they get the child, no matter how much easier it is (if any easier) for them to adopt, it’s still giving a needy child a good home and a loving family that they wouldn’t have gotten otherwise. For me, that’s the bottom line.