Court Voids Rowe\'s Loss of Parental Rights

[Cristine87]

In my own opinion, I don't think Debbie's motive is to get full custody and take the kids away from Michael. She could probably care less about them. I think she just wants to find a way to be apart of Michael's world again, as Vicky said, and the kids are a way for her to do it.

I agree! That probably is her motive. Why the hell would a judge let her have her parental rights again? She gave them up! Why does she deserve them back?

 

[whisperAdmin]

She got them back on a technicality. She didn't do anything spectacular and she didn't "win" them back, as some in the media would have you believe. So it wasn't like she had any basis to have them reinstated. The judge in 2001 didn't follow procedure. That's it.

 

[Badine]

Im sorry I may sound dumb for asking this. I read this whole thread carefully but does this mean that Debbie gets full custody of the kids? Or does she just get the right to be a part of the kids life.

I aploligize for asking a silly question. I just dont know what all this means.

 

[whisperAdmin]

Im sorry I may sound dumb for asking this. I read this whole thread carefully but does this mean that Debbie gets full custody of the kids? Or does she just get the right to be a part of the kids life.

I aploligize for asking a silly question. I just dont know what all this means.

No. It means that when she teriminated her parental rights in 2001 the judge didn't do what he was supposed to do. So he reversed his decision and it's now like she never terminated her parental rights at all. That's it. She still has not been granted any visitation or custody (to my knowledge).

 

[Anonymous]

Im sorry I may sound dumb for asking this. I read this whole thread carefully but does this mean that Debbie gets full custody of the kids? Or does she just get the right to be a part of the kids life.

I aploligize for asking a silly question. I just dont know what all this means.

Neither. It just means now she can call for a full out custody 'battle' by requesting joint custody or visitation rights. Since her rights were terminated before it wasn't possible.

So if they get some agency to interview Prince and Paris and the children somehow show interest in having a mother and the court decides she should be in their lives...guess who's life she'll be in too?

Michael=meal ticket. Probably wants to get friendly with him too. She's stuck on him like shit.

 

[MJJ_Lover]

^ Agrees. ullhair

 

[Pirate.]

She didn't want the kids.




Said over and over.




"Not my kids."



Now she wants the kids.




What the hell.

 

[RHlovesMJ]

Do you guys really think that even if a court were to grant Debbie custody of Prince and Paris that Michael would actually let her have them. Just remember he's not on US soil now. Besides, he can always tie the case up in court for years and years, which I imagine he will definitely do if it should come to that. I don't see Michael ever giving these kids up unless he is six foot under, and even then, I imagine that he has taken precautions to make certain that Debbie couldn't get them. Who knows who Debbie is in with? After all, someone is bound to be financing her little venture. Court costs aren't exactly cheap, especially in custody battles. And for the people who feel that Michael should allow Debbie to even be a part of the children's lives, my question to you is why should he? After all, what exactly has she ever done for those babies? Not a dang thing, except for laying on her back with her legs apart and then giving birth nine months later. That makes her the children's biological mother, but it sure as heck doesn't make her their mom! She gave those precious babies up years ago, and if anyone reads that court transcript, it's quite clear that she wasn't agonizing over her decision to give her babies up! Giving up your children is a painful decision to make for anyone who gives a hill of beans about their children. To me, Debbie didn't even seem the slightest bit upset during the termination proceedings. In fact, she seemed almost flippant about it. Also, to my knowledge, she never even changed a diaper while Prince and Paris were babies. Maybe she couldn't afford to break one of her precious nails! What gives her the right to even say that she's their mother? If I was Debbie, I would be ashamed to even show my face in front of Prince and Paris! It's also as funny as heck to me that she didn't even consider herself to be a mother until Michael cut off her $900,000 a year alimony! Answer this question for me: what would be more detrimental to the children, not getting to know Debbie, an almost perfect stranger, or not seeing Michael, their daddy, or Blanket, their baby brother, again? Not to mention not seeing anyone else in the Jackson family? And, by the way, why in the heck is Debbie studying forensic psychology? That sent up a few red flags with me!

 

[HeavenSent]

And for the people who feel that Michael should allow Debbie to even be a part of the children's lives, my question to you is why should he? After all, what exactly has she ever done for those babies?

My sentiments exactly.

To be fair, hahahaha...we don't know the whole story. And I'm not just in the habit of giving Michael an unbalanced benefit of the doubt, simply because he's Michael. But come on...Miss Absenteeism is tripping. Making a move now, vs. earlier in the game? This suggests to me that DR expects everyone to operate on HER time. If she has needs, then she to reconcile them in another way. Lest she forget, these are children's lives that she's trying to disrupt! It seems so spiteful to even suggest wanting joint custody at this point.

 

[SpecialJanet25]

My sentiments exactly.

To be fair, hahahaha...we don't know the whole story. And I'm not just in the habit of giving Michael an unbalanced benefit of the doubt, simply because he's Michael. But come on...Miss Absenteeism is tripping. Making a move now, vs. earlier in the game? This suggests to me that DR expects everyone to operate on HER time. If she has needs, then she to reconcile them in another way. Lest she forget, these are children's lives that she's trying to disrupt! It seems so spiteful to even suggest wanting joint custody at this point.

You got that right! Although yet we don't know the story DR sound like a woman with big time issues.

 

[whisperAdmin]

She seemed damn eager to terminate her parental rights too:
Finsilver: You understand that you will not have the right to take care of the children?

Rowe: No. And I don't want to. And -- not that I don't love them. I do. I think they're adorable. They're his kids. They're his kids. They're not my kids. They're his kids.

Finsilver: You completely understand that when the order terminating parental right it entered --

Rowe: Today. Right?

Finsilver: Well, it's up to the judge.

Rowe: Today.

Finsilver: -- that it will cut off unequivocally --

Rowe: Absolutely. Done. Complete. I don't have any rights.

Finsilver: -- all rights and responsibilities regarding the children?

Rowe: Yes. I didn't mean to interrupt you.

 

[Anonymous]

I can't believe that.

If MJ read that he has right to be mad. Now they are making him out to be the bad guy. This is nonsense.

 

[HeavenSent]

That's what I don't understand. Why can Debbie renege on her own words by way of taking her ass to an attorney, but if Michael were to as much as sneeze, people wanna trip on him.

So disgusting.

 

[Anonymous]

Debbie could first off admitt she was wrong by doing what she did, maybe then it wouldn't seem so wrong of her now. Just say she wasn't thinking.

But by now having her attorneys claim that she had her rights removed improperly they make it seem as if she didn't know what she's doing.

I really do wonder if MJ has read her actual statments. That would be enough to make me want to ingore her ass too.

...and if she felt like she was intruding, she needed to demand he let her see them instead of the other way around. You don't just give up like that.

Like I said, she's knows she's missing out now...it just began sinking in. She alienated herself.

 

[Cover-It]

It seems to me that someone needs to get Michael one way or the other. Many feel that Mj should not have been proven innocent at his trial even though the evidence was clear that Mj could NOT have EVER hurt a child. However it seems that many have chosen to go down the hate path towards Michael. How sad that they feel this way and how sad it is that they are allowing themselves to be manipulated by the press and media. It is also a sad day that the press and media will also march on with thier lies and cover-up of the case from the beginning even as far back as 1993 with Jordy Chandler. What would the world think right now if way back when....the media got it right the first time with their headlines when it should have said
that the Chandlers were scheming a plot against Michael to rid him of his life and money!!!! It is a sad world. I think that Michael Jackson is the most persecuted man in the world right now. Shoot they aren't even attacking Bin Laden like they are Michael!!!!

 

[Cover-It]

Then too maybe she feels that if she gets custody of her children from Michael them Mike will have to pay her child support maybe its all about the money after all isn't that what it always boils down to? Just a though!

 

[anne]

Maybe it's for the better. The important thing is what's good for the children, not Michael or Debbie. She won't get the custody anyway, I don't think she wants that. But depriving the children of half of their heiritage isn't cool! They should know where they come from and who they are. And it better happens fast, or else they'll get the facts from a non-friendly sourse, and probably get mad at Michael. I know how it is to grow up in a culturally devided family, where every side has it's own "right way"- you always turn out mad at your parents. So Michael and Debbie better work the ish out.

 

[whisperAdmin]

Maybe it's for the better. The important thing is what's good for the children, not Michael or Debbie. She won't get the custody anyway, I don't think she wants that. But depriving the children of half of their heiritage isn't cool! They should know where they come from and who they are. And it better happens fast, or else they'll get the facts from a non-friendly sourse, and probably get mad at Michael. I know how it is to grow up in a culturally devided family, where every side has it's own "right way"- you always turn out mad at your parents. So Michael and Debbie better work the ish out.

He hasn't deprived HIS children of anything. She's the one that walked out of their lives and told them not to call her mother. The best interest for HIS children is to have a stable environment with the parent that's never turned his back on them. She herself has called them his children. She never wanted to be a mother....until that cash stop rolling in.

As far as I'm concerned, after she said what she said and did what she did, she doesn't have a "right way". She has no way because her opinions about HIS children are and should be irrelevant. He shouldn't have to work anything out with her. He's raised his children since they were born. Not her.

 

[Anonymous]

Anne said the children should be of concern and not MJ or Debbie and that is correct. Whoever f*cked up in the past is out the window. Yeah she fucked up, it's not fair, and I don't like her ass either...but the children deserve a chance. I think Debbie wants back in after realizing how she messed up her own life by leaving theirs. Had she stayed she'd have two good kids around her and MJ would probably be providing her everything she's missing...as far as money wise and for her maybe even emotionally.

The 'deal' that MJ and Debbie had was dodgey in the first place and MJ should have known it would end up in a sticky situation. Any woman that will come to you and offer you children WHILE YOU ARE STILL MARRIED is a little more than just nice. But I know MJ was desperate. But he had other options, such as how Blanket was concieved.

Anyway.

Have her come in as a friend for awhile, FRIEND. So if she bails they wouldn't be missing much. They have ways of working things out. The courts will monitor things as well, if Debbie is a deadbeat mother then they will probably let MJ just kick her to the side for good.

This will probably end with her getting visitation rights.

Debbie and MJ's situation isn't rare. Father/Mother bails, then comes back years later begging for forgiveness...and sometimes eventually the bond can be created or mended.

I'm not blaming MJ at all, if he's mad...I understand any concern too. I just think they should give it a go and then if it doesn't work out, to hell with it all, right? I didn't get the impression that MJ hated Debbie though, when he spoke about her in LWMJ...but then again MJ is a nice guy he wouldn't say anything rude even if he wanted to. At least not in front of the cameras.

 

[privacy]

I agree with Vicky. I think Debbie was just doing what she felt was right at the time. Feelings change.

If the kids want a mother figure, and Debbie wants to be that person, then I don't see why not. If it all goes pear-shaped, at least Michael can close the book on it and said he tried.

Obv I'm not Michael.. but I'm speaking as if I were in his position.