Michael Jackson

[norealityhere]

Originally Posted by buglover

If Jackson never legally adopted these kids, will they have to go into the system or will they be cared for as written in the will?

There were some CA attorneys on the news today who specialize in kids, etc. All felt most likely they'd not be put in the system and that they'd probably go to family if that's what MJ requested. They said that if Debbie Rowe or the biological mother (s) tried to get the kids, the judge would still look at who has cared for the kids / who have they known during this time. That's per CA law and how judges rule. THey did not seem to think there'd be problems even though MJ hadn't adopted them. They're saying they believe he didn't adopt them because he did not expect anyone to contest it ( they were basically referring to Debbie Rowe who, seemingly, has relinquished rights to these kids ). Allegedly, she was very well reimbursed for having been the surrogate.

[Google]

 

[guttergal]

Originally Posted by norealityhere

I'm not a big fan of Al Sharpton, but I do think he's trying to ensure that Michael gets some good press for his contributions and is not treated like a freak. I commend him for that.

I'm sure Al Sharpton's personal agenda will come out before long. The fact that Joe Jackson and Al have been in contact speaks volumes.

[Kao]

Personally, I don't believe anything from "a source" and that's where all this latest info is coming from (except the will). With all the nutbags coming out of the woodwork claiming parentage I won't believe that they aren't Michael's (and someone else's) when a DNA test is performed.

[Amy Lee]

Originally Posted by buglover

Do we really know if all of this is true about the kids?

No, we don't. The only thing that is certain is that he is dead. The rest is tabloid fodder and speculation. No actual proof of anything but the former.


eta: Co-sign with Kao.

[steppemaster]

Originally Posted by Gala62

words are failing me .... I assumed he was at least the donor.

Those poor children, I hope they're protected from as much of the circus as possible...

NBC ran Martin Brashear's documentary last night--"Living With Michael" in which Martin asks Michael a lot of tough questions--including if he was the sperm donor for the kids--and Michael said "Yes, of course those were my sperm."

I can't remember the exact date the documentary was done--'98 maybe?
It's the one where Michael also talks about how his dad used to beat him and his brothers during rehearsals when they were children if they made any mistakes.

Maybe NBC has the documentary on their website? It was a special "Dateline" presentaton. It had a lot of interesting stuff about Michael's family--both the one he grew up in and the one of his own with his kids.

(I think the documentary made Martin Brashear's career--he was working for the BBC at the time. He's now on ABC's Nightline)

[norealityhere]

The Bashir documentary was done in 2003, I believe.
It was wildly panned worldwide for being an example of 'yellow journalism" at its worst.

[prhoshay]

I don't see how anyone with 2 eyes could think that those babies were Michael's. Nature, in the animal kingdom and with us humans, too, makes it so that offspring, somehow, resemble their fathers. Some how, somewhere, you will see the biological "daddy" in their children. But it's not unusual for men to be raising children that are not biologically theirs, whether they know it or not. There us a saying, "Momma's baby; Daddy's maybe."

I started out looking like my dad, and turned into my mother!

[MamaC]

On one of the shows tonight, they said that on the older two kids' birth certificates, MJ is listed as the father. Surprisingly, Debbie Rowe is not listed as the mother; that field is left blank!

Anyway, when the older two were born, MJ and Debbie Rowe were "married" so he would be considered the legal father.

Debbie Rowe is stating that she is, in fact, the bio mom.

Sources say that MJ's dermatologist is the bio dad.

But, legally, MJ is the father of the older kids.

"Blanket" is another story. No one knows who the surrogate mom was nor the sperm donor. Apparently, this was kind of like a "black market" baby deal. I had heard that the woman who carried this child never knew she was doing it for MJ. Not sure whose names are written on this one's birth certificate. If MJ's name is listed as father then, legally, he is considered the dad.

[misskitty]

Originally Posted by MamaC

...Anyway, when the older two were born, MJ and Debbie Rowe were "married" so he would be considered the legal father.
Debbie Rowe is stating that she is, in fact, the bio mom.
Sources say that MJ's dermatologist is the bio dad.
But, legally, MJ is the father of the older kids.
If MJ's name is listed as father then, legally, he is considered the dad.

I just heard that regardless of MJ's name being on the birth certificate, there is now proof that he is not the bio Dad to any of them. And, because Michael Jackson DID NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPT ANY OF THE 3 CHILDREN, he may not be considered as their father and the children won't be considered as MJ's children at all. They are really just children born via in vitro that were paid for by MJ and were brought up by MJ. If he is not the bio Dad, and he did not adopt the children, he has really just been a caretaker of the children and the family may not have any legal right to them after MJs death.

Their closest legal relatives, who would be the actual donors of the eggs and sperm could possibly challenge that they are the next of kin and are entitled to the children and the inheritance they may eventually get.

Now isn't that scary. Poor children.

[dagwood]

If his name is on the birth certificate, he is legally their father. He doesn't have to adopt or be bio.