Reidblog [The Reid Report blog]

Think at your own risk.
Thursday, July 02, 2009
I ain't sayin' she's a gold digger... Debbie Rowe wants the kids
The lady with the Jay Leno Chin, who has alternately described herself as merely a "vessel" and a "thoroughbred," for the production of Michael Jackson's progeny; who said she merely "offered her womb to Michael as a gift" (and for the gift of money for herself,) and who has said that she has no relationship with the children she served as surrogate mother for, and that she doesn't want to see them, now says, totally coincidentally a day after Jackson's will was released, and perhaps after figuring out exactly how much money is on the table, says she wants "her" children. Debbie Rowe is apparently willing to separate Paris and Prince Jackson from their younger brother and the only family they know, and take them from their grandmother ... because...?

Rowe would apparently have a strong legal case, if not a moral one, even though she may be no more the biological mother of those children than Jackson was the biological father (though he actually was a parent to them, unlike, say ... her...) and we could even see the surrogate mother of the third child, "Blanket," come forward for her piece of the action ... I mean the love of her child ... too. Well, if it's headed to court, here are a few alleged Debbie Rowe statements the court might want to take into consideration:

On her maternal instincts and parenting ability:
""I was just the vessel. It wasn't Michael's sperm. Just like I stick the sperm up my horse, this is what they did to me. I was his thoroughbred."....

"I know I will never see them again. I was never cut out to be a mother - I was no good. I don't want these children in my life. My children are my animals now."
On her rent-a-womb:

"I offered him my womb - it was a gift. It was something I did to keep him happy."

"I got paid for it, and I've moved on. I know I will never see my children again."

And this:

"I was never a good mother, I never felt any attachment to them. It was a better feeling giving them to him than it was keeping them as my own.

So what changed, Debbie dear? Well ... maybe it's this, as reported by TMZ:
We've learned who's getting what in Michael Jackson's trust. Here's how it breaks down.

Katherine Jackson will get 40% of the assets.
Michael's 3 kids will get another 40%.
And the remaining 20% goes to several children's charities. We're told the charities have not been designated yet and are not specified in the trust.
What's 40% of $1 billion? I'll bet Debbie's done the math ... and would it be too much to create a charity called The Deborah Jean Rowe Foundation, like, yesteray???

Care to vote on whether she should get custody of the money ... I mean the kids? Here you go!

Flashback: Debbie before she gave birth to their second child, pretends to be really married to Michael, but admits their "friendship is more important." Now, of course, she's blabbing to anyone who'll talk to her that their marriage was a sham (not to mention outing Jackson as not the kids' bio father.)

Flashback 2: Debbie defends giving up custody of her kids back in 2003, adding: "my kids don't call me mom because I don't want them to." Watch:

Plus: will the nanny also enter the custody sweepstakes?

Ah, dying rich!

Labels: , , , ,

posted by JReid @ 7:07 PM  
ReidBlog: The Obama Interview
Listen now:


Site Feed

Email Me

**NEW** Follow me on Twitter!

My Open Salon Blog

My TPM Blog

My FaceBook Page

My MySpace


Blogroll Me!

Syndicated by:

Blog RSS/Atom Feed Aggregator and Syndicate


Add to Technorati Favorites

Finalist: Best Liberal Blog
Thanks to all who voted!

About Reidblog

Previous Posts
"I am for enhanced interrogation. I don't believe waterboarding is torture... I'll do it. I'll do it for charity." -- Sean Hannity
Templates by
Free Blogger Templates