Facepalm Friday

This is where your hosts will list their top picks for this week’s FacePalm moment—something they learned or read about this week that caused the FacePalm to happen (you know, the expression of embarrassment, frustration, disbelief, shock, disgust or mixed humor as depicted in our Rally FacePalm smiley).

We invite you to add your FacePalm of the week to our comments. Go ahead and add a link, tell a personal story, or share something that triggered the FacePalm on the subject of child welfare or adoption.

Your Hosts Selections:

British Win a Baby Game

“The scheme, which the media have dubbed “win a baby,” has already run into trouble on ethical grounds with critics calling it inappropriate and demeaning to human reproduction.

Britain’s Gambling Commission has granted a license to fertility charity, To Hatch, to run the game from July 30.

Every month, winners can scoop 25,000 pounds’ ($40,175) worth of tailor-made treatments at one of the UK’s top five fertility clinics for the price of a 20 pound ticket bought online. The tickets may eventually be sold in newsagents.

The lottery is open to single, gay and elderly players as well as heterosexual couples struggling to start a family.

If standard IVF fails, individuals can be offered reproductive surgery, donor eggs and sperm or a surrogate birth, the charity says, though the winner will only be able to choose one treatment.

Winners will be put up in a luxury hotel before being chauffeur-driven to a treatment center. They will also get a mobile phone and a personal assistant to help with queries.”

New “win a baby” game draws fire
[Reuters 7/7/11 by Stefano Ambrogi]

Buying a Baby on the Internet? No Big Deal, it will only cost you 1000 Euro if you get caught.

I mean c’mon, they were JUST trying to buy a baby on the internet. What’s the big deal? Trafficking, schmafficking. They WANTED to be parents. Isn’t that all that matters?

“A Dutch couple who bought a Belgian baby over the internet three years ago have been given an eight-month suspended sentence.

“The court sentences the couple… for using a false (birth) certificate and an illegal adoption to an eight-month suspended sentence, a 1000-euro ($A1327) suspended fine and 240 hours of community service,” said a statement from the Dutch court on Thursday

Three years ago the Belgian parents of baby Jayden, who already had a child and ran into financial trouble, offered the newborn for sale for 7500 euros on the web. A childless Dutch man and woman, now aged 28 and 29, took up the offer, the court said.”

“Said the court on Thursday: “The accused only thought of their own wish to have a child and not of the implications for the baby.” Like we haven’t heard that from entitled PAPs before!

“Dutch penal code did not rule against the buying of a baby.” Of course not, what’s the big deal?

“The baby was placed in the care of an adoptive family in December 2008.

Belgian prosecutors in Ghent said they wanted to prosecute Jayden’s parents and grandmother, the Belga news agency reported, with the Ghent judges’ chamber to announce a decision shortly.” They don’t even sound too sure that they want to do anything to the seller!

Dutch couple sentenced over internet baby
[Nine News 7/15/11]