This is very confusing to me. One, Stone has already apologized for the stupid remarks so I really don’t understand why she’s bringing the spotlight back on her idiocy once again. Two, I don’t even understand how she’s relating one thing to another. Because you have miscarried before, other people deserve to be hurt by your words? I just don’t get it. From Celebitchy,

“Sharon Stone has said that her controversial comments about the 2008 Sichuan earthquake in China were a result of her hurt after suffering two miscarriages.

The actress apologised twice after initially suggesting that the natural disaster could be “karma” for the country’s treatment of Tibet.

Stone told Prestige: “I was in some kind of crazyville. The horrific loss of those people’s children caused me tremendous grief. I was relating to this earthquake like some kind of crazy mother.

“In that moment, I was so grief-stricken, and I was really relating to their grief. I had lost children myself. All of that was really heavy upon me. I was really speaking as a heartbroken mother.”

She added: “I had two pregnancies that I lost in the late fifth month. And this is so awful because I had to go have surgery when my children died. This is a trauma that you just cannot bear.”

I hate to be the one to tell her but, saying that these people were devastated by an earthquake because they had done bad things  is not relating to their pain. Actually relating to someone’s pain would be saying something like, “I am just so devastated for those mother’s that lost their children.” I am particularly angered by this because I too have had several miscarriages. And I too had to have surgery after one of them (it was just one though so I’m sure Sharon would think that she’s much worse off than I was.) But I have never ever thought it was okay to hurt someone because of my own personal tragedy. Yes, it’s a painful time and yes, the hurt is almost unbearable. But I’m sure that’s exactly the same way all those people in China felt after seeing their lives literally collapsing around them. When will Sharon Stone learn to just keep her dumb mouth shut?

“The court order of 2007 provided that Roan was to go to school in San Francisco. Sharon went to court to try and modify the existing order,” he said.

“She wanted the court to modify the order so her child could go to school in Los Angeles. But the court felt that, for whatever reason, that she did not meet a burden to move him out of San Francisco during the school year.”

Sharon – who also has adopted sons Laird Vonne Stone, three, and two-year-old Quinn Kelly – reportedly wanted Roan to live closer to her so he could bond with her other children.

The papers state there is to be no change in Sharon’s “custody, visitation, holiday and vacation schedule” and order that her telephone number is programmed into Roan’s phones.

“Sharon not lost any iota of custody or visitation that she had before,” Singer said.”

So my entire point in this is that I don’t understand why everyone is so all over Stone about how she has ‘lost custody’ when really, you can’t lose something that you never had. And people are also talking about they wonder who’s taking care of the other children back home when this is clearly not a situation of neglect or abuse…she wanted him to change schools for Pete’s sake! As I mentioned earlier, I’m not a huge fan of this star in the first place but in this instance, I think people need to give her a break. She wanted something, she didn’t get it. Does that make her a horrible person?