Angelina and Brad Adopt Pax Thien Jolie-Pitt!
Angelina Jolie completed the adoption process this morning and arrived with her son, Maddox, at the Vietnamese Tam Binh Orphanage to pick up the new addition to their family, three-year-old Pax Thien Jolie-Pitt. Pax reportedly cried during the official adoption ceremony while his newly adoptive mother soothed him in Vietnamese.

Click for more details about little Pax and a question for you...
Pax Thien, renamed from Pham Quang Sang, has been living at the Tam Binh orphanage on the outskirts of Ho Chi Minh City since 2003, when he was abandoned at a hospital as an infant.
Angelina and her boys must now wait to be granted approval from the U.S. consular and embassy officials before a passport can be issued for her new son.
Lil' Pax will join his three new siblings, Cambodian-born Maddox, 5, Ethiopian-born Zahara, 2, and baby Shiloh Nouvel, 10 months.
So, what do you think about Angelina changing Pham Quang Sang's name? Do you think a name change is a little too traumatic for a three-year-old?
Also, can Angelina rock more? Heart. Her.
« TWoP Acquired by Bravo | Main | Maybe She's Born With It, Maybe It's Adderall »




Depends. All we see is the surface; his legal name is being changed. Just because it is changing doesn't mean he will be called the new name. He may not even know himself as Phang; he could've had a nickname during his years in the orphanage. Who knows? I just love Angelina enough to believe she wouldn't do anything detrimental to this little boy.
Posted by: Julie | March 15, 2007 at 05:12 PM
Yeah, I think at three it is too late to give him a new name. He's leaving the only life and caregivers he's ever known. Adding name change to that will be even more jarring to his reality. I think it is really, really great that Jolie and Pitt are adopting these kids and it seems from the outside that she and Brad are good, loving parents. But, I do wonder about the apparent ease with which celebrities are able to adopt internationally. I wish it was that easy for ordinary folk.
Posted by: Anna | March 15, 2007 at 05:19 PM
I don't think 3 is too late for a name change. I don't think my son really knew his real name until this year when he started school. We always called him by a nickname, as did the teachers at his daycare so he never really heard his real full name. He is four and it doesn't bother him in the least to be called by his real name now. It wasn't a name change, of course, but it was a change for him to be called it. For Pax, it will probably just seem like a nickname from his new parents, and not be a big deal at all.
Posted by: Kyla | March 15, 2007 at 05:45 PM
The only thing my uncles mentioned when they adopted their son from Cambodia is that they had to do a lot of "donating" to the government.
Posted by: Staci | March 15, 2007 at 07:31 PM
I don't think it's too late. He's going to be learning a whole different language, and it will probably be a similar learning curve to learn a new name than learn to respond to his current name with a different pronunciation and intonation.
Posted by: Nic | March 15, 2007 at 08:18 PM
I still find it hard to love her (and Brad) because of the whole Jennifer Aniston thing. I heart Jennifer. I know I need to get over it. But I haven't...yet.
;-)
Posted by: Amy H. | March 15, 2007 at 08:27 PM
Did Brad really adopt this kid, too? I hadn't seen anything that said he was legally involved in this. I wondered if it was because it was faster for her to adopt herself and then add him on later in the US. Anybody know?
I know I'm supposed to think she's saintly for doing all this adopting, but too many more kids and I'm going to think she's Mia Farrow.... does she really have time for all these kids?
Sorry. I'm just cynical.
Posted by: Prisca | March 15, 2007 at 08:39 PM
Prisca, I read in US Weekly (where do I find the time?) that Angelina adopted as a single parent because it's either illegal or harder for unmarried parents to adopt from Vietnam. So it was Angelina that did all the adopting. But I'm sure Brad will adopt Pax once they bring home home.
Posted by: theresa | March 15, 2007 at 09:37 PM
These kids have the name Jolie-Pitt, so why haven't Brad and Angelina gotten married yet?
Posted by: Elizabeth | March 15, 2007 at 10:19 PM
I can't imagine a kid having his name changed at age 3 would be any more damaging than a lifetime of people mispronouncing or misspelling his original name. Anyway, if he hates Pax and wants to change it later he's certainly free to do so. My boyfriend decided to change his name when he was seven and he's okay.
Posted by: Leah | March 15, 2007 at 10:42 PM
Prisca - Good point. Angelina actually adopted him as a single woman, yet gave him Pitt's last name. So, technically Pitt did not adopt him.
Posted by: Lena | March 15, 2007 at 10:50 PM
Amy H., Thanks for being honest and not nasty, and if you continue towards moving on you know Aniston wouldn't be comfortable with the large family unit Brad and Angie are going for.
Brad has his soulmate and hopefully Jennifer will find hers.
I think the name change is no big deal, it's normal for yound children to have a name change and even now many people change their name to express their idea of who they are. Why is it a big deal when Brad and Angie do it?
The most important issue is that this little boy will have a great opportunity few people get, parent and siblings who will love him and protect him for the rest of his life. He's been bless...lets hope that all this publicity will help his friends at the orphanage to get the same opportunity.....a loving home.
Posted by: Jeanette | March 15, 2007 at 10:59 PM
I think Angelina should not have been given a child so quickly. She went to the orphanage, met the kid, and now they're on their way home. NOBODY, absolutely nobody else gets to do international adoptions like that. I know she's got a lot of international fame, but underneath...she's buying that kid. She'll give him a good home, but geesh, so would so many millions of other potential adoptive parents that would give Anything to get a child, but either can't afford the enormous fees, or have been rejected by countries like china and russia, who have essentially closed up international adoptions. I just think this is reprehensible. It gives the wrong impression of the very rich and famous being able to just pluck children from their home country and bring them to the US (or UK, in Madge's case) with no regard to international law.
Posted by: margalit | March 15, 2007 at 11:26 PM
Giving a child a home from any place in the world is wonderful. At 3 - leaving familiar surroundings is hard. Abundant intelligent resources available, we are the home of the brave & the land of the free regardless of etc. -Very Heart
Posted by: LLori | March 16, 2007 at 02:27 AM
It's funny - I agree with the comments that everyone has made on here and you all have totally summed up my completely confused and mixed feelings when it comes the Jolie-Pitt relationship and their expanding family.
Yes, Angelina is beautiful and obviously very loving and caring to want to help give children a better life and all that. But the other side of me says, "hey, this is the same freaky ass chick who used to make out with her brother on the red carpet, wore a vile of her ex's blood around her neck and of course - stole Brad's heart from Jennifer. I'm really not supposed to like her after all that craziness, right?!"
Then there's Brad - what a beautiful man he is - and again, a loving caring parent, etc. But, "HEY JERK - you broke Jennifer's heart to be with that freaky ass chick who now has everyone believing she's all grown up and relatively normal" (including myself, damn it)!
And God knows, I love a big family. Came from one myself and think they are the greatest. But tell me what regular person out there is able to afford to do what they are doing? Ok, good, they are doing a wonderful thing by providing a wonderful home and life for a very unfortunate child - but sheesh - if only it were that easy for everyone to do, there would be a lot less orphans in the world!
And one more thought - they must have a full-time Nanny helping out, right? Because I'll just hate the thought that I might actually have to love the two of them even more for actually being "parents" to these 4 beautiful children and not having their hired help raise them 24/7!!
Posted by: Lisa | March 16, 2007 at 09:15 AM
Unmarried couples can NOT adopt from most countries, especially the Asian ones, and since they're not married, she had to do it as a single woman.
The process to adopt from Vietnam usually takes about 4-5 months after you receive your referral, and we really don't know how long they'd been working on this prior to the trip this week. They were in Vietnam in November, and for all we know, she received her referral and decided to go meet the boy in person (which, it's not like we can all do that!). So assuming the referral took place in November, and she's picking him up now, it's within the standard time frame.
Of course, I still think celebrities get preferential treatment. But in this case, it's not like it moved at a speed WAY different from what is considered the norm. Then again, length of time varies due to many circumstances...
My only *problem* with this adoption is that it just seems so soon after the baby was born. I mean, would it have killed them to give her a whole year to be the baby and get the attention that goes with it? It just seems like Shiloh's getting short-changed.
Posted by: Tere | March 16, 2007 at 10:34 AM
Margalit - actually, from what I have read, this adoption has been an ongoing process since before Thanksgiving. So, while 5 months might be relatively quick for an international adoption, I would hardly say that Jolie "went to the orphanage, met the kid, and now they're on their way home." She and Brad went to this orphanage in Vietnam over Thanksgiving to start proceedings.
Also, we have to remember that none of us know the intimate details of these transactions - we only know what is shared with, or dug up by, the sensational press. It is not really fair to make judgments based on snippets of gossip fodder.
Bottom line, this boy is a lucky little bastard who will have a much better life than he ever could in a Vietnamese orphanage, and kudos to Angelina and Brad for adopting an older child who might not have been chosen otherwise.
Posted by: Sadie | March 16, 2007 at 10:39 AM
I agree with Sadie. From what I have read they began the adoption process last year. They have always said they wanted a large family. I also heard that they will be looking for an African girl next.
I applaud them. She is a good mama. You can look at her children and see that they are happy and well loved. I don't believe they have a nanny. In the pictures I have seen the woman who was with them was Brad's mama.
I don't think the name change is a big deal at all. His new name means"peace". I think it is beautiful. He is a lucky little boy.
Posted by: Jenny H. | March 16, 2007 at 01:54 PM
The issue I have with this whole "adopt em all while we're young" attitude is the idea that being a parent is more about money. I believe it's about time. Children need to know you will be there for them. While AJ talks now about staying at home with the latest child for a while, she didn't stay at home very long with the other ones. At one point recently she and Brad were both off doing things and the kids were with nannies and his mother!
As far as the name change, I hate the name and the change- the change because while I don't think it will be scarring, I do think 3-year-olds know their name and it's just one more adjustment- why add that on? I hate the name because it's such an inappropriate "statement" name- there are at least 3 nonviolence groups with that name. Is she gonna quit making "Tomb Raider" movies? Will Brad not make any more "Fight Clubs"?
Posted by: BaltimoreGal | March 16, 2007 at 02:00 PM
Also Sadie,
I may be splitting hairs, and I'm sure you don't mean it this way, but I'm not sure you'd want to use the phrase "lucky little bastard" in reference to an orphan- seems inappropriate to me.
Posted by: BaltimoreGal | March 16, 2007 at 02:02 PM
I think its ludicrous that the adoption went through that quickly. Some of us have been waiting over a year for a child. Of course, our names are not Angelina Jolie or Brad Pitt...
Posted by: megan | March 16, 2007 at 02:56 PM
A 3 year old knows their name. That said, however, I think that since the child is going to have to learn an entirely new language (which at that age is not hard as they have not completly mastered their original language), then a new name to go along with it is not out of the question. I do think that if she should adopt more children in years to come, that she should place them 5th in line, etc, as far as age and not in between the ages of the children she already has. I think she was trying for a brother for Maddox close to his own age though, without displacing his familial position as the oldest.
Posted by: Dixie Sugar | March 16, 2007 at 04:06 PM
It took about 4-5 months for my uncles to adopt from Cambodia.
Posted by: Staci | March 16, 2007 at 04:19 PM
Adoption times vary from country to country. The stated length for Vietnam, from time of referral, is 4 to 5 months.
Posted by: Tere | March 16, 2007 at 04:29 PM
I think a name is a name... although I don't know that I'd name my child Pax. I do believe, however, that all Angie's & Brad's adopted children are very, very lucky, as long as the famous adoptive parents are as loving behind closed doors as they seem to be while out and about. They have the means to provide a wonderful life for these children, and 100 more if they want.
Posted by: JP | March 16, 2007 at 05:32 PM