Does Rosie O'Donnell's Rejection of Handicapped Child Ruin t

Post Reply New Topic

If the Rosie cannot handle it, it's better off for the child's well being to be with someone who can. Besides, Rosie is so loud and annoying. She is not the first thing that pops into my mind when I think of someone I would want for a mother regardless. She seems like she would be brash and pushy and just generally irritating. Could be a blessing in disguise.

The only reason she is able to adopt so easily and effortlessly is due to the fact she has a lot of money and influence. She doesn't give kids that need a home a home. She goes and handpicks from mothers at homes for the unwed or through agencies where there's a lot of demand for their babies.

Thanks, AspieUtah!

On the other side of the coin, if I were pregnant, determined to give the baby up for adoption, I would insist on spending the day with each potential adoption candidate before deciding whom should have the privilege of raising my child and if someone with Rosie's personality was in the line up, I would pass her up in a heartbeat. I just find her too obnoxious and overbearing. Hopefully she wouldn't put on a fake, nicey-nicey charm routine because I would want to see what they are really truly like before deciding. What is normal for them?

I am not the least little bit surprised.
Rosie O'Donnell is a swine, and a hypocrite in more instances than this one. For the life of me I cannot figure out how she ever got to be so popular and wealthy. This sow is not in the least little bit talented, attractive, or even personable.

Having bowels outside of your belly is not a developmental disability.

If this was a surrogacy situation, it leaves the woman carrying the baby in a bit of a pickle. Presumably she didn't want the baby even if it was healthy. Now she's stuck with it.

My point, fwiw, is that what that whiny lady meant by "special needs" in this context is a child that will need emergency neonatal surgery - that's emergency surgery before it's born - and will thereafter, for at least the first handful of years (hopefully) of it's life, require considerable medical care just to survive.

And that is, categorically, not the same thing as a child that is perfectly healthy but will never be smart.

It's not nice to say, "hey no thanks, I'm not signing up for that kind of years-long roller-coaster of emotion, terror, horror, and extreme medical bills, and a 10% chance that the kid will die of it. I'm gonna pass."

Not nice at all.

It's a very selfish thing to decline to take responsibility for a person who is a train wreck before they are even born.

And hey, so is adopting a healthy white baby.

I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand I totally agree with blauSamstag and others who say it's horrible that she's rejecting a child just because it's going to need intensive help. My heart goes out to that baby; he or she needs the care of someone with the resources to pay for whatever is needed, more than anyone. I cannot imagine how anyone with a heart can turn their back on the poor little one. The lack of compassion is shocking.

On the other hand, I also agree with those who said if she's that certain she can't handle it, then sure enough she's the worst person for the task, by default. Best the child goes to someone fully willing to be there for it.