Friday, August 05, 2005



John Roberts

Hey. . . Did you see where the New York Times has taken it upon itself to investigate the adoption records of the children of John and Jane Roberts? These two children, Josie and Jack, were adopted at birth from Latin America. According to Drudge, a Times insider claims that this look into the adoption papers is just part of the paper's "standard background check".

Two questions: I thought the children of public officials are supposed to be "off-limits". It was true of Chelsea Clinton, so why shouldn't it be true of Josie and Jack Roberts? I thought adoption records are supposed to be private and confidential - especially when they are closed adoptions like the Roberts' are. Closed adoptions are mutual agreements between the birth parents and adoptive parents that there is to be no contact between the parties involved until the child becomes a legal adult - hence, the records are sealed off (closed) until that time to protect the parties' identities. Why does the Times feel the need to do stick its' nose into a place it doesn't belong? Who give them the right to attempt to find out information about this? If they find out something - anything - about the adoption that they would deem necessary for the public to know (and believe me, there shouldn't be ANYTHING that would fall under this category) - are they not then violating Jack's and Josie's right to confidentiality and privacy? Okay, okay - I know that's more than two questions, but you get my drift.

I AM AN ADOPTIVE MOTHER OF TWO DAUGHTERS. MY ADOPTIONS WERE CLOSED. IN BOTH INSTANCES, IT WAS A MUTUAL DECISION BY ALL PARTIES INVOLVED. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD ANY ORGANIZATION INVESTIGATE THESE PRIVATE RECORDS. PERIOD. (WITH MOUNTING SHRILL ANGER IN MY VOICE).

This is sooo ludicrous and reprehensible.


Also, did you see where the Washington Post actually criticized the outfits the Roberts' children wore to the announcement of Roberts' nomination? Oh, please, give me a break! How nitpicky can you get? I thought the kids looked adorable - and besides, it reminded me of two very famous DEMOCRATIC kids - Carolyn and John Kennedy, who wore very similar outfits at various times during their father's presidency. Of course, they only received warm and gushing comments about what they wore!

Hmmm - I see a trend here. If you're a Democrat, then your kids are "off limits" and you get rave reviews about your style of clothing. If you're Republican, then your kids need to be investigated as part of your background check, and you are made fun of if you're wearing the same exact clothes as your Democratic peers.

Can you say "double standard"????

2 Comments:

At 3:02 PM, Blogger Sweetheart said...

How do people who try and question others private lives sleep at night? Especially when it involves children. I am so very pro adoption. I was a counselor at our local CareNet CPC for seven years. I also taught Lamaze to young mommies to be. I was so blessed always to be a part of an adoption process. Your daughters are blessed that while they were growing in another woman's womb they were growing in your heart. How special. Thank you for always being so encouraging to me in my posts! Have a great day girlfriend.
Kelly

 
At 9:43 PM, Blogger Jeff H said...

It isn't really a "double" standard; it's not meaningful standard at all, other than rank self-interest. Whatever the NYT decides is in it's interest--of pushing its Godless, liberal agenda--they'll do, with no compunctions whatsoever.

 

Post a Comment


Thank you for your thoughts...

Back to the main page