Brad Pitt's Birth Control Problem

31. If anyone can care for a disabled child financially it would be somebody who makes millions per movie deal. Most of their children are raised with the help of nannies anyway. I don't see why a celebrity couldn't or wouldn't raise a special needs child. I agree that it doesn't seem to fit into the 'perfect family' picture. It is much harder for a person/family making $50,000. a year to raise a child with such needs yet they are doing it everyday. Because they want to. If a celebrity wanted to, they would. The proof is there in the statistics. Celebrities want a perfect family as most do, but they can afford one, and throw the money to people who cannot.

Posted at 9:49PM on Aug 27th 2006 by Lily

32. It is obvious that Brad Pitt has finally found
his equal in Angelina Jolie. They share the same
interests in life (Having and adopting children, being
doting parents, and always putting family first), and in
work (they are both very respected actors and philanthropists
-Angelina Jolie for over five years).

To AMD.
Since you mentioned it in such a mean-spirited manner,
I could not resist but tell you that your accusations are
unjust. J. Aniston said on Oprah (can be easily proven!)
that her marriage wasn't what it looked like (I hope you
understand that), and that no one cheated.She later
started with her manipulations of the media, as we all
know, and caused all this insanity.I won't even comment
on that one.
As for adopting children, WHY don't you tell J. Aniston
to do something GOOD with her money and time.

Posted at 9:57PM on Aug 27th 2006 by simone

33. This is for #18-pf-

Sumner Redstone is head of Viacom, which owns Paramount Studios. Mr Redstone realized that Tom Cruise's pay, which included all a percentage cut his film's gross profits, and DVD sales, etc, was taking a huge chunk of $$$ from Paramount. In other words, say u pay $8.00 for a Tom Cruise movie, $1.89 9(give or take) goes into Tom's bank account.
Viacom's stock was also dropping. We all know that Tom Cruise went on a verbal attack over Brooke Sheld's baby blues, n we also know that Tom C is not a qualified DR either, we also know Tom's passion over Scientology.
When an estimated $150 million was not expected to come in for MI3, we might all think that is 'chicken feed'?, Mr Redstone finally realized that paying such a huge amount of money to Tom C was not justified.
When Redstone ended the relationship with Tom Cruise, Viacom shares went up.
The bottom line is a message to all actors, that the studio bosses will no longer pay such outrageous amounts of money to their actors.
A $20 million paycheck for George Clooney may still work, but with the slowing down of profit sales at the box office, studios can no longer afford such high salaries.
The question is 'How much money does a top actor really worth?'
Certainly not $100 million like Tom Cruise.

Posted at 12:59AM on Aug 28th 2006 by Jordan

34. ok so i think that if everyone would just leave Brad and Angelina alone they would be much happier people. im not saying that they arent happy, but would you want a bunch of people commenting on you, your family and you every move. i think that if you give the people a little room to breathe we would hear better things about them and not how some company wants Brad to be their model for a morning after pill. thats is just my opinion though.

Posted at 10:48PM on Aug 27th 2006 by nikki

35. Simone:
i just wanted to say that you need to leave Jenifer Aniston alone, this blog is about Brad and Angelina, and to be perfectly honest, i have been Team Aniston all along. so why dont you just leave Jen alone and focus on what the blog is about??

Posted at 10:54PM on Aug 27th 2006 by nikki

36.
AMD ........YOU'RE RIGHT , ON EVERYTHING YOU SAID. JOLIE IS A
HOMEWRECKER , SHE'S NOT BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE .
THERE'S MANY OTHERS WHO'S HOMEWRECKERS ALSO. IF YOU TAKE AWAY THERE $$$$$$ AND STATUS , THEY WOULDNT BE A NOBODY " CELEBS ARE ONLY POPULAR BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU , PAYS FOR THERE MOVIES , CD'S , ETCCCC ....IF YOU DIDNT DO THAT , THEY WOULD BE VERY POOR , AND NEVER EXIST.



7. I'm sorry, I know this has nothing to do with the subject of the article, but I am having such a hard time picturing Angelina as some Mother Teresa type woman. I can't erase the images of her kissing her brother on the lips, her being all over Billy Bob in front of the cameras as he's talking about how they f****d in the limo on the way over to an awards show (MTV maybe???), her talking about how she has multiple lovers at one time, and her treating her own father like dirt when she essentially has done the same thing, by hooking up with a married man, that she so condemns Jon Voight for. I don't believe that her and Brad Pitt didn't sleep together until Brad Pitt was divorced. For a woman as sexual as she herself admits she is, I find that part hard to believe. While I respect the fact that she has adopted children, I also feel that there are other children in our own country that need to be adopted. How come there are never any stars that adopt any special needs kids? They need just as much love and attention as a child from a foreign country. I am the parent of a blind kindergartener, and I wish I had the financial resources to adopt other children just like her, or with other disabilities. I just feel that if you have the millions of $$ that these celebrities have, they would want to help children with disabilities. I guess that would spoil their vision of "perfect family life". If there is such a thing in Hollywood. And one more thing, has anyone else out there noticed that almost every pic of these 2 together, Brad barely smiles anymore. But yet pics of him on the set of Oceans 13 show him smiling nonstop. I guess he doesn't like being led around like a little lap dog. Sorry for the long rant, that really had nothing to do with the article, just had to get it out.

Posted at 3:30PM on Aug 27th 2006 by AMD

Posted at 9:48PM on Aug 28th 2006 by justpicky

37. It takes a lot more than a bank account to take care of a child--any child-regardless of their needs.

To Simone: Your comments, "To AMD.
Since you mentioned it in such a mean-spirited manner,
I could not resist but tell you that your accusations are
unjust. J. Aniston said on Oprah (can be easily proven!)
that her marriage wasn't what it looked like..." are just plain ridiculous in my opinion. First, I don't beleive there was anything "mean-spirited" about AMD's comments, and second, "J Aniston" telling Oprah her marriage is "not what it seems" is not what you made it out to be. J Aniston has said several times that she thinks the media infatuation with her life is insane. She does live in Hollywood, doesn't she? Don't ever believe what you read, see, and hear if it comes from the hills. That's what she wanted us to understand. Meida paints a pretty picture and it is not always what it seems. Remember that next time you decide to idolize someone like Jolie. She's wacked. They all are, in their own ways.

That is all.

Posted at 12:10AM on Aug 28th 2006 by Jillian

38. They didn't use Plan B. She was pregnant before he was divorced. Don't
think they would be good for any ads. Who cares........

Posted at 1:03AM on Aug 28th 2006 by Gayla

39. For those of you who argue that Brad and Angelina should be adopting a special needs child, here are some unpleasant facts. The following is an abstract of a paper written about elective termination and the diagnosis of Downs Syndrome in Hawaii:

Prenatal diagnosis and elective termination of Down syndrome in a racially mixed population in Hawaii, 1987-1996
Mathias B. Forrester, Ruth D. Merz *

The impact of demographic factors on the prenatal diagnosis and elective termination of Down syndrome in Hawaii between 1987 and 1996 were examined. Data were obtained from a population-based birth defects registry and included 306 Down syndrome cases. 131 (43 per cent) of the cases were prenatally diagnosed. Of the prenatally diagnosed cases, 110 (84 per cent) were electively terminated. Advanced maternal age or having a maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein screen performed increased the probability of having an affected pregnancy prenatally diagnosed and electively terminated.

This means that a vast majority of parents who received the diagnosis that their child had DS ELECTED TO terminate their pregnancy. If a mother can't/won't keep her own flesh a blood, why would expect anyone to adopt a special needs child?

Don't get me wrong. I think people who DO adopt special needs children and absolutely extra special.

But as the statistics shows, 84% of those who found out that their foetus had DS didn't even choose to keep their own special needs baby but elected to abort. And I WONT criticise people who make the choice to abort their own baby if diagnosed as having DS or some other handicap requiring very special care. I won't because in the same position, I'm not sure what I would do. So I won't judge those who don't.

Who are you to criticise Brad and Angelina for not adopting a special needs baby? Would you adopt one? Had it been your baby who had been diagnosed with DS or some other serious congenital handicap, would you have kept elected to terminate your pregnancy or ask you wife to terminate her pregnancy? Some of you may indeed have elected to have the child. But I'm sure many of you would not have done so - as the statistics show, 84% of those who were diagnosed as having a DS foetus, chosed to terminate the pregnancy. Are they bad people? NO. it is a tough decision.

I have a friend who has an autistic child who loves him to bits. But she tells me quite honestly that had she had a choice, she would not have had him. Is she a bad person or a bad mother. NO she is a fantastic mother to her autistic son. But, as she puts it to me - she just wouldn't choose it for him or for herself and she certainly won't judge anyone who chooses NOT to have a special needs child.

Geri, On the matter of adopting a child from the US. Please check your facts. Children under 2 years of age - there is a waiting list of 2 years or more to adopt a caucasian. Meanwhile, thousands of babies born in third world countried would DIE of disease or neglect unless someone comes in to adopt them. Its not reverse bigotry - you are just a plain bigot.

Posted at 2:26AM on Aug 28th 2006 by Sad Facts

40. Geez "sad facts" I think you went a little crazy on the facts there! People wondered why celebrities adopt from other countries instead of special needs american babies and you went on about moms aborting imperfect fetuses!

I think it's wonderful that kids get adopted. Why criticize where the child came from or it's physical/mental condition? All children need parents. Everyone has the right to choose their own path to fulfillment in life. You only live once and no one can take care of all the children in the world. It's no ONE person's responsibility to take care of all the troubles in the world- just because Jolie wants to help doesn't make it her responsibility to help in the way someone else thinks she should. If someone sees purpose and fulfillment in adopting a child from a third world country - and they will take care good care of that child - why should anyone criticize that?

I do think it's a little odd that celebrities (especially single ones) adopt several children when they seem clearly incapable of maintaining personal relationships! I don't see how that can turn out well for anyone - but I suppose they hire competent nannies to do the real mothering while they do the "hollywood" thing and interact with the kids as time allows.

And spin it however you want - Brad was married when the relationship started - there's just no altering that. That was really uncool. You don't do that to someone, it's humiliating, hurtful and cruel. End or mend a failing relationship before considering other relationships!

Posted at 6:57AM on Aug 28th 2006 by ben

41. Where on earth did you hear that Mother Theresa would only help Catholics? You are completely off base, she was in India where most people are Hindu, she felt all people were children of God. She would pull dying people off the street and help them. You are insane & and I find it disgusting that you would even try to cut her down. She will be waving to you from above when you croak and rot in hell.

Posted at 9:49AM on Aug 28th 2006 by Sharon is retarded

42. I don't understand why people are so one track minded when it comes to celebrities. Angelina Jolie may have had a sordid past, but so do a lot of people.
What is so hard to believe about someone caring so much about a cause that she devotes her life to it. She has the means to, and i mean judging by the UN naming her as a good will ambassador, obviously her work has done a great deal of good

I think it's bullshit when people can't see past a celebrity's mistakes. She grew up in the public eye, she was in her early 20's when she started her career . And i can say that the crazy stunts she pulled are normal for many 20 year olds, what we see now is a woman in her early 30's who is growing up, and actually realizing that there is more to life than herself, and the fact that she has opened her arms to children who may not have had a chance in their native countries is commendable. It's bullshit for someone to say why didnt she adopt a special needs child instead of a child who was malnourished and probably destined to die before they reached school age.
Thats like comparing sept. 11 to katrina, it should be a non-issue.
The fact that she has adopted less fortunate children (before it was "fashionable") is all that should matter, and her personal decisons should not be scrutinized.

Posted at 10:22AM on Aug 28th 2006 by Jayley

43. hello--------he's just an actor. he's a person, people are not perfect. people take advantage of any story with his name on it to discuss such the off the wall subjects. leave angelina out of it, leave tom cruise out of it, leave mother teresa out of it, an for the love of god, leave aborting special needs children out of it!!!!!!

Posted at 11:15AM on Aug 28th 2006 by lighten up

44. A lawsuit would be a win for each company in the publicity department.

Posted at 11:52AM on Aug 28th 2006 by Michael

45. To Geri
ONce again, WHY don't you ask ANISTON
to do anything (ANYTHING!) GOOD w/ her
money (truly ridiculously "earned"), and her
TIME. Instead of MANIPULATING gullible people
with her constant toxic remarks about her
divorce almost two years ago.
By now, also based on Aniston's statement on
Oprah, everyone knows that her marriage was
OVER before he even met Angelina Jolie.
WHAT part of it you STILL don't get?!

SO WHY NOT ANISTON DOING ANYTHIG GOOD?!

Posted at 12:03PM on Aug 28th 2006 by simone