Official says no Ukraine adoption for Elton John (too old and isn't married)

[Kadie]

Official says no Ukraine adoption for Elton John

Monday, September 14, 2009

(09-14) 07:23 PDT KIEV, Ukraine (AP) --

A Ukrainian official says Elton John cannot adopt a 14-month-old Ukrainian child because the pop star is too old and isn't married.

John said Saturday that he and his male partner wanted to adopt an HIV-infected boy named Lev whom the singer met during a visit to an orphanage.

But Family, Youth and Sports Minister Yuriy Pavlenko tells The Associated Press Monday that adoptive parents must be married, and Ukraine does not recognize homosexual unions as marriage.

Pavlenko also says John is too old. The singer is 62 and Ukrainian law requires a parent to be no more than 45 years older than an adopted child.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/09/14/entertainment/e070549D08.DTL&tsp=1#ixzz0R5rYutyx

[brendan120678]

1. While I don't really have issue with age restrictions....

Denying one an adoption based on marital status or sexual preference is terrible. Sadly, it happens all the time.

[Not Me]

2. This is sad...

So the boy is better off in an orphanage than with a 62 year old man who can give him love and direction?
Would they deny the child being place with a grandparent? Same argument.

[Bluenorthwest]

3. whose loss? the child's of course.

I love Elton very much. I hope this clears his eyes a bit about marriage equality. He is personally on record as saying 'I'm not married' and saying that civil unions are just fine. Those quotes will not be helping his case in the adoption.
He's always been wrong about that, and now maybe he will see that.

[stray cat]

4. You think a same sex marriage certificate will make them change their mind?

[Bluenorthwest]

5. That is neither here nor there

the point is that if it were a marriage, they could not claim no marriage, and would have to say what they meant. My exact point was about Elton, not the Ukrainians. He has gone on about how civil unions are good enough, equal enough and all of that. I do not agree with him, and I bet he'd rather not be on record stating 'We are not married' as he is. He ought to support equality for all. His wealth makes it easier to forget why it is so vital.
I'd rather that bigots have to say they are bigots. Not have them served well by the laws in UK and US.

[enlightenment]

6. The point is that if he were married by UK law,

the Ukrainian government could STILL regard the marriage as invalid because they do not recognize same-sex unions. Calling it 'marriage' wouldn't change that.

ALL marriages in the UK are 'civil unions' first and foremost, and while it is true that Elton disavowed 'marriage', he wasn't suggesting that same-sex couples should settle for something less:

We're not married," he told the press. "Let's get that straight. We have a civil partnership. I don't want to be married! I'm very happy with a civil partnership. The word 'marriage,' I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships." (emphasis mine)

As you said, the crux of the matter should be equality of rights under the law - right?

[Bluenorthwest]

7. So the headline 'too old and not married' is true

where as it could read 'Ukraine refuses to acknowledge UK marriage'. The headline I'm reading says he is not married. And it is true.
In the UK, only Elton among the people I know see it as having the same equal rights. In the US, civil unions are a shadow and a sham, not coming anywhere near equality. He is perceived as suggesting settling for something less, and I have been asked many times why Elton John opposes gay marriage. Why he is happy with it but I am not. So he harms the goal of equal rights under the law for all with his poorly worded rantings. He should care enough about equality for all to give thought to how he phrases what he wishes to say. He obviously can afford to live where he wishes, and has more than the average experience in the differences in laws from place to place. He speaks in those quotes in universal terms when he should be sticking to the UK. What he says is NOT true in the US. Civil Unions do not get the same equal rights. Mr Furnish is an American, so leaving that unsaid was thoughtless. David is out of America by power of money, for a reason. Why do they not speak of why they are not 'equal' in the US? He could use his pulpy pulpit to say the whole truth, he's done it before.
Today, he's just another gay, rejected for being so. Probably the first time since 69 such a thing has happened to him. Perhaps he will be less prone to make rash statements about what is and what is not equal. That is all.

[enlightenment]

8. I'm not entirely certain why you believe Elton John should

be responsible for making things happen they way you think they should happen - the fact that he is a public figure? He made a brief comment, probably one that was not entirely thought out. He's an entertainer, a musician - not a political figure, a scholar, or a philosopher. You're trying to make him be the water-carrier for an entire movement and that is unreasonable.

[cbdo2007]

9. Why didn't he shop for an orphan in a country where he could actually adopt one?

I'm sure he knew the rules before he went orphan shopping in the Ukraine. There are plenty of other countries he could adopt from without being "married" so unless he wanted to cause a big problem about it he should have just chosen one of them.

I know multiple same-sex couples that have adoped from Guatamala with no problem. I just don't see the point of going somewhere to adopt where you legally can't adopt.

[Hannah Bell]

10. it doesn't sound like he was "shopping for an orphan". it sounds like he met

this hiv-infected boy & wanted to help him particularly.