Adoption: are children commodities to meet the needs of others?

There might well be more to Elton John's suggestion that he would like to adopt a child than has appeared in the media (though the wording of coverage such as this and this seems to suggest that it has been generated by Elton John himself). From a political point of view, one wonders whether what we are actually seeing is an attempt to extend the fashion for "celebrity adoption" into gay adoption.

Elton John's suggestion does raise any number of questions - and one hopes that any attempt by Elton John to go through with an adoption will be subjected to the same examination and safeguards as would apply to others seeking to adopt.

Is an on-the-spot, perhaps emotional, reaction to meeting a child sufficient grounds for a serious wish to adopt that child?

Should a serious attempt to adopt a child - if that is what it proves to be - be announced in the media, thereby creating a momentum that makes it difficult for due scrutiny to be given to the request?

What influence will the fact that Elton John and David Furnish are a high profile same-sex couple have on the outcome of the scrutiny of an attempt to adopt a child? In the present cultural environment, will it create a presumption in favour that would not exist in a similar situation with an opposite sex couple?

And, within the scheme of things in the UK, it is the "best interests of the child" that are meant to be paramount, whereas, assuming that the media quotation of Elton John is accurate, a large part of this seems to be about Elton John meeting his own needs:

[Elton] John said the death of his long-term keyboardist, Guy Babylon, had also helped change his mind.
"Last week I lost one of my best friends ... It broke my heart because he was such a genius and so young and has two wonderful children. What better opportunity to replace someone I lost than to replace him with someone I can give a future to."