Debbie Rowe wants "her" two kids with MJ

[underdesea]

From MSNBC:
Can 't say I'm surprised to see this; figured it was only a matter of time.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31711537/ns/entertainment-music/


By Jonathon Lloyd and Chuck Henry
NBCLosAngeles.com
updated 13 minutes ago

Debbie Rowe wants custody of the two children she had with Michael Jackson.

“I want my children,” Rowe said during a 90-minute phone conversation Thursday morning with Chuck Henry of KNBC in Los Angeles.

Rowe said she was willing to submit to any testing, including DNA, to prove that she is the children's true biological mother. Rowe also said she would submit to psychological testing.

She also said she would seek a restraining order to keep Jackson's father, Joe Jackson, away from the children.

The agreement does allow for visitation, but Rowe said it's a very difficult process.

"I am stepping up," Rowe said. "I have to."

Rowe said she was still grieving. She said she decided she had to seek custody after Jackson's death.

Jackson, who died at age 50, left behind three children: son Michael Joseph Jr., known as Prince Michael, 12; daughter Paris Michael Katherine, 11; and son Prince Michael II, 7. Rowe was the mother of the two oldest children.

The youngest was born to a surrogate mother, who has never been identified.

Rowe said she was concerned about splitting up the children. She said she did not expect the court to grant custody of the third child, but added that she would be willing to accept custody.

Rowe, who was married to Jackson in 1996 and filed for divorce three years later, surrendered her parental rights. An appeals court later found that was done in error, and Rowe and Jackson entered an out-of-court settlement in 2006.

Earlier this week, Jackson's mother was appointed temporary guardian of the children, pending a hearing on Monday. A will signed by Jackson in 2002 and filed with the court Wednesday requests that Katherine Jackson be named guardian of the children, but in the event of her death, he asked that singer Diana Ross be appointed.

The will also specifically leaves Rowe out of any inheritance.

"I have intentionally omitted to provide for my former wife, Deborah Jean Rowe Jackson," the will states.

Rowe's attorney, Eric George, told the Los Angeles Times he will be at the custody hearing Monday to represent her.

ETA: I've posted the newest version of the story, which adds some details not included in the original text.

 

[happygirl]

If she hasn't been in the kids lives until now, Why the sudden interest now. Maybe all the money that comes along with it.

 

[MizTink]

$$$$$$$$$$

she's a crazy Bi+ch.......she "sold" those kids long ago

as strange as i know MJ was, she still didn't want those kids until she thought about what would come along with them. it's just not right. he was their dad. their only parent

 

[Imzadi]

If she hasn't been in the kids lives until now, Why the sudden interest now. Maybe all the money that comes along with it.

Yes, since those children are named as his heirs, the money follows the children. Whoever gets to care for the children, whether, Debbie Rowe, by petitoning the court that she is the "rightful parent," or Michael's mom, Katherine, they will be sitting pretty on easy street, wallowing in the children's money. The caretakers need to keep the children living in the lifestyle they were accustomed to. So the caretakers get to live the high life, too. Hopefully, whoever gets the kids will also have their wellbeing at heart, too.

MJ had about 400 hundred million dollars of debt when he died. Since his death, his music, cds, mp3s, old record albums, songs, memoribilia, etc., have spiked in sales and are playing on air non-stop. Especially now that he's no longer spending out millions of dollars a day, it is estimated that his upcoming royalties for the sales & continuous playing of his song catalogue (and yes, he owned the Beatles song catalogue,) can wipe out his debt and create a fortune for his estate - and for the kids.

Perhaps Michael should have left Debbie Rowe something in the will. Enough that she'd be appeased and won't sue for custody. I have a feeling that she will settle again for an undisclosed amount and get "visitation rights" that she may or may not really be interested in having.

 

[livie1205]

I do not know for a fact but do you think maybe she was bullied and forced out of their lives?He DID have a lot of power.I do remember about 2 yrs ago she went to court and tried to get visits and he had tons of lawyers go after her then it just went away.I could be wrong.
If she is their mom she does have a shot I think.I just do not think the Jackson family would be the best place for them...he did state many times that his father abused him and that is why he had so many issues...is that what is best for sweet little kids?I think ALL of them see $$$$ .The father gives me the MAJOR creeps...he was advertising his buisness the day after his son died!
I hope that the kids end up with someone that will love them, but even though she gave them up I still think they should know their mom and one day they WILL seek her out anyway.

 

[mousetravel]

If she does get the 2 children, I'm worried about the 3rd child. It would be very sad to see those children separated.

 

[happygirl]

If she does get the 2 children, I'm worried about the 3rd child. It would be very sad to see those children separated.

That is a good point. I don't see why she would want to break those kids up.

 

[ma2jr]

I wonder if it's not just retribution for being left out of the will... as she waits for another out of court settlement

 

[underdesea]

If she does get the 2 children, I'm worried about the 3rd child. It would be very sad to see those children separated.

I was thinking the same thing. Being separated would seem to be really hard on them, on top of everything else they're going through. And I wonder how they will feel as they get a little older -- if they will ever wonder if the person or people who got custody did it because they love the children, or because they wanted the "perks" (*cough* money *cough*) that went with them...

 

[LoraJ]

I think they would be better off with her than the Jackson family. But I wouldn't want them separated from Blanket. So sad.

 

[WDWMom]

Yes, since those children are named as his heirs, the money follows the children. Whoever gets to care for the children, whether, Debbie Rowe, by petitoning the court that she is the "rightful parent," or Michael's mom, Katherine, they will be sitting pretty on easy street, wallowing in the children's money. The caretakers need to keep the children living in the lifestyle they were accustomed to. So the caretakers get to live the high life, too. Hopefully, whoever gets the kids will also have their wellbeing at heart, too.


Perhaps Michael should have left Debbie Rowe something in the will. Enough that she'd be appeased and won't sue for custody. I have a feeling that she will settle again for an undisclosed amount and get "visitation rights" that she may or may not really be interested in having.

Why do the kids need to keep living the lifestyle they were accustomed too???? If my DH and I died today, I won't expect someone to do that for my children. I would, however, expect them to be loved, fed well, have decent place to live and clothed but my no means would I think they would buy them the things I do or to live in our house.

In the end, those children just need someone to love them and bring some consistency into their lives along with the basic neccessities.

 

[Imzadi]

I think this is the crux of it here where she supposedly says:

"Rowe said she was concerned about splitting up the children. She said she did not expect the court to grant custody of the third child, but added that she would be willing to accept custody."

The court always rules for what is in the best interests of the children. They probably won't split up the children. Debbie knows this. She will "gracefully" in the end give up her two kids, to live with Blanket, (after Katherine Jackson forks over a ton of cash.)

Someone said on another thread that Katherine Jackson is separated from Joe Jackson. She's living in L.A. & he's in Las Vegas. Let's hope this is true.

But, it may actually be a good thing that Debbie Rowe has stepped forward if she can somehow push that Joe Jackson only be allowed limited visitation rights, even if the kids end up with Katherine. Separated is NOT the same as divorced. He's probably trying to move back in as we type, to get a hold of those kids.

 

[happygirl]

I'm waiting for Blanket Biological sp ?? mom to come out of the woodwork.

 

[M5ward]

First - the money goes into a trust to be administered by what appears to be three unrelated people (who may or may not be honest.) She would have to prove that she is, in fact, the biological mother and probably come up with a pretty good reason as to why she terminated her parental rights (if, in fact, she did.) Once this hits the courts, some judge may appoint someone he/she feels would be an unbiased administrator of the trust.
Any judge with any common sense and compassion would NOT separate these three children. IMHO, Katherine Jackson is NOT a suitable guardian for these children. Michael Jackson, while tremendously talented, was certainly not a model of good mental health, stability, reason or normalcy; this came from somewhere, and where else did it start if not with his parents and upbringing. If he was abused by his father as is being claimed, why did his mother not stop it - and don't tell me she didn't know because that's just BS. The other issue is Ms. Jackson's age; these children don't need to be in an environment where their new caregiver abandons them through death. She is almost 80; and if she were to die before the kids reach majority, who gets them then? No one in this family seems competent. Diana Ross...puh-lease!
Michael Jackson should have had legal advisors who had every aspect of his death planned out - children, assets, debts, etc. Obviously, he did not. His death has been a bigger production than his life; it's pathetic.

 

[WaltD4Me]

I'm waiting for Blanket Biological sp ?? mom to come out of the woodwork.

Yep, this is only the beginning. This whole thing is going to be a complete mess. Supposedly Blanket's mother doesn't know her child went to Michael Jackson, but it's going to come out at some point now. I truly feel bad for those kids.

 

[underdesea]

But, it may actually be a good thing that Debbie Rowe has stepped forward if she can somehow push that Joe Jackson only be allowed limited visitation rights, even if the kids end up with Katherine. Separated is NOT the same as divorced. He's probably trying to move back in as we type, to get a hold of those kids.

From what I've seen of Joe, he's probably already planning to market the three children as the newest generation of Jackson performers and force them to sign with his new record label

 

[Imzadi]

Why do the kids need to keep living the lifestyle they were accustomed too????

Their case isn't the same as yours. MJ's estate will HAVE the money, (if the upcoming record sales bear out to making a fortune.) Because they actually have inherited wealth & they don't have to live as paupers. Because it's better that the kids get and stay accustomed to haivng money now, than at 21 where they might just spend it all in a stupid spending spree for a couple years and end up backrupting themselves.

 

[stahshee]

I have to wonder if Debbie was unable to fight for them due to MJ has the$$$$$ to fight. Also MJ mom is 80 years old . What is really best for the children??

 

[livie1205]

about them not splitting up the kids,yes it would be sad but if something happened to my dh and I (we have 3 kids,1 our,1 his and 1 mine) they would split ours up to the other parents.I do not think keeping the kids together will have a huge impact on who gets them.

 

[Imzadi]

Yep, this is only the beginning. This whole thing is going to be a complete mess. Supposedly Blanket's mother doesn't know her child went to Michael Jackson, but it's going to come out at some point now. I truly feel bad for those kids.

Supposedly, the surrogacy records are sealed once the baby is handed over and the birth certificate is written out. Why would they open them for ONE case? It would set a horrible precident to do so. I don't think even for Blanket, they'd do that. i think he was considered a one parented child. Now an orphan. Of course it is CA...

From what I've seen of Joe, he's probably already planning to market the three children as the newest generation of Jackson performers and force them to sign with his new record label

Yes, I hope in Katherine Jackson's grief, she's not being stupid and leaning on joe. Meanwhile he's slipping her papers to sign.