Who will get Michael’s Kids?

Ya gotta know that the coverage on Michael Jackson’s death is going to become nauseating. I’m not saying that he doesn’t deserve the tribute or the respects but like Princess Diana and other huge world news, we will be seeing it fill the headlines for a long, long time to come. The headlines have already been filled with everything from those close to him giving statements to questions surrounding the circumstances of his death. One of the biggest headlines so far to be released is the question over who will get custody of his kids. Of course, this only makes sense as the first thing we often wonder about after hearing such sad news is: what will happen to the children?

Michael Jackson left behind three children. His eldest son is named Prince and is 12 and his daughter is named Paris and is 11. These children he had with Debbie Rowe, who signed away her parental rights but now after the death of their father, wants to be the one to care for these children. She’s also hoping to get custody of Prince Michael II, who is now 7, even though he is not her biological child. If Debbie wants custody though she’ll have to fight for it against Michael’s elderly mother. From Gossip Rocks,

“The mother of Michael Jackson’s two eldest children is preparing to battle the singer’s elderly mother for custody.

Former nurse Debbie Rowe gave away her parental rights in exchange for a £4.2million pay-off ten years ago.

But last night, she told friends she would fight ‘tooth and nail’ for their return.

Miss Rowe has only seen her son Prince, 12, and 11-year-old daughter Paris, who were conceived through artificial insemination, intermittently but believes she is more equipped to care for them than Jackson’s 79-year-old mother Katherine.

A friend said: ‘She understands there will be a vicious legal battle and she knows Katherine will not readily hand the kids over to her. But she is their natural mother and she will do whatever it takes to get them back.’

Miss Rowe, 50, is also expected to try to seek custody of Jackson’s third child, Prince Michael II, commonly known as ‘Blanket’, even though the seven-year-old was conceived by a mystery surrogate mother.

In December, author Ian Halperin, whose biography The Final Years Of Michael Jackson is due out next week, claimed that Jackson was suffering from a chronic lung condition and had just six months to live.

It sent Miss Rowe scurrying to her lawyers in the hope of restarting negotiations with Jackson over the children’s care.

‘I’m their mother and they need me,’ said Miss Rowe, who breeds horses and lives on a ranch in rundown Palmdale, California.

Police congregated outside the Palmdale home of Debbie Rowe, ex-wife of Michael Jackson and mother of two of his children

Police congregated outside the Palmdale home of Debbie Rowe, ex-wife of Michael Jackson and mother of two of his children

Her friend said: ‘At Christmas she just wanted to re-establish contact with them. But now she wants full custody. Michael’s mother is almost 80, Debbie doesn’t want them to lose their father and then their grandmother.

‘She has been slated over the years for giving up her children. But in reality, Debbie has always stayed in touch with them and Michael. It’s an odd relationship but then everything connected to Michael is odd.'”

So what’s the best case scenario here? That the children go live with their mother who 10 years ago thought that getting a huge payoff was better than being a mother? Or is a better scenario that the kids go live with someone who may only have a few years left here themselves. Should anything happen to Michael’s mother, the children would then be uprooted once again, just a short time after their father’s early and shocking passing. And what possible kind of shape could Michael’s mom be in to take care of children at such an age?

I hate to say it, simply based on her actions 10 years ago, but I think that the kids going to Debbie Rowe might actually be the best thing. She is their mother and she is most likely, physically able to take care of them. Whether she’s emotionally able is another matter. Maybe there’s a better option that just hasn’t come to light yet? I certainly hope so because neither of these sound good to me.

Be Sociable, Share!

Related Posts:

  • None Found

0 comments ↓

There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment