Crunchy Con

Debbie Rowe: Mother of the Year. Not.

Thursday July 2, 2009

Categories: Culture, Family
Well, well, well, the woman who rented out her womb to noted psychotic and crypto-pederast Michael Jackson is getting all blubbery about "her" children. Excerpt: "I want my children," Debbie Rowe, Michael Jackson's ex wife and the estranged mother of...
Advertisement
Comments
EB
July 2, 2009 3:36 PM

Rather than accessories, I think MJ was trying to be a father to children that his father was not. Was their life normal? No. But it seems at least that these kids had a loving father-figure (in a matter of speaking) who had his heart in the right place... however misguided.

Saint Andeol
July 2, 2009 5:13 PM

dudes, i understand the thrill that comes from calling a Christian a hypocrite - i was once in junior high too - but c'mon, this is Michael Jackson we're talking about. a kid walking around in a masquerade ball costume with his crazy bandage-faced dad isn't necessarily in the best environment.

silver
July 2, 2009 5:33 PM

All very true Rod. But these kids are also being "commodified" by people who need to use them to get up on a soapbox about 'kids being commodified'. One of the sad puzzles about this whole hugely sad puzzle is just how sweetly unaffected those kids look, compared to the kids of many celebrities, who are already posing for the cameras.

hattio
July 2, 2009 5:41 PM

Rod,
I have to agree with EB. I think you are right on about everything EXCEPT that Michael Jackson thought of those kids as accessories. Bad father, agreed, fruitcake, agreed, terrible environment for children, agreed, probably screwed them up for life, agreed. Wanted them as accessories, disagree. Michael Jackson was clearly someone who wanted desperately to get back to a happy childhood. He thought he could provide that for his kids and wanted desperately to do so. He failed, but that's not at all the same as someone who just wants 2.5 kids to accessorize with their house with the white picket fence.

Saint Andeol
July 2, 2009 5:44 PM

Dear 'Your',

any other time i'd agree witcha, but when it comes to Michael Jackson, all bets are off. :)

Love,
Saint Andeol

Robin Thomas
July 2, 2009 5:48 PM

Yeah, I dono Rod...I wasn't a fan either but there doesn't seem to be much evidence that he wasn't a good father. Oh, the window thing...not sure that was evidence of anything at all. Rowe is obviously smelling money.
Jackson was a sad figure. It still isn't clear to me that he actually molested anybody. I don't know if the kids lied to get money...perhaps we will never know.
He was a tortured soul and deserves some sympathy I think. From what I've read, he probably died from an overdose of a med they use to put you to sleep during operations. He BEGGED for it because of horrible insomnia. The poor guy was coming apart because he knew he no longer had the stuff to do all of those shows. Fame sucked the life out of him.
I can't dance on his grave. I said a prayer for his soul and for his family; leave it at that.

Cecelia
July 2, 2009 6:17 PM

Yeah - he wasn't convicted so - while it was always supicious - I will refrain from judgement on the child molestation issue. Particularly given that those who did accuse them came off ultimately as less than stellar parents who seemed to see Jackson as a cash cow. On the masks - I always thought that was so weird and unhealthy but I caught a segment on the news - Jackson's desire was to make the kids unrecognizable so they could go around anonymously in their private lives which he apparently succeeded at - all sorts of people who were friends with the kids now popping up and saying how the kids did very normal things without anyone recognizing them and how this was positive for the kids.

I can see that Jackson's mom isn't young and so one might have concerns about her as the children's custodian long term. But seperating these kids seems even more wrong to me. Debbie Rowe had nothing to say until the will was released - a will which very deliberately leaves her nothing. So now discovering she gets nothing she wants the kids. Makes ya wonder.

Travis Mamone
July 2, 2009 6:38 PM
http://tmamone.blogspot.com

I heard they're not really his kids, either. I mean, let's look at the facts: Michael Jackson was still technically African-American, so that would mean his offspring would be of color, right? Well, I saw a picture of his eldest son without his mask, and looks pretty Anglo-Saxon to me! The whole thing is just weird. That's when I put on "Off the Wall" and try to forget about all the other stuff.

Alice AN
July 2, 2009 7:50 PM

No Rod, this is what happens to the Rich and Famous....

Alice AN
July 2, 2009 7:53 PM

Actually, this happens anytime a rich man passes. Add fame to the mix and the public gets front row tickets to a family feud.

thomas tucker
July 2, 2009 9:41 PM

Who knows what Michael Jackson wanted, intended, thought or felt?
No one really.
Especially not us.


Andrea
July 2, 2009 10:12 PM

Who knows what the real story is there. From the interviews I've read with her over the years, I think she's a bit of a flake too, but I also think Jackson managed to frighten her and muzzle her and keep her from visiting the children she gave birth to when she apparently wanted to do so. She's made attempts over the last eight years to get visitation and, by most accounts, she's been stonewalled. I think she probably started as a surrogate and chances are good she had some self esteem issues, maybe was star struck, thought she would become important and feel good by giving Michael Jackson this great gift of her children. For him she was only a vessel, a servant he paid off once she had given him what he wanted. She took the money, but it might have been a situation where she actually did want to see the kids and was denied because he was rich and powerful.

The fact that the kids' money is tied up in a trust she wouldn't get her hands on gives her credibility. So does her statement that she'll get DNA testing to prove she's the mother and that she'll undergo psychological testing. That tells me she IS the biological mother and she's serious about trying to be involved in the kids' lives. I don't think Michael Jackson was the biological father of any of those children, though he was their psychological father and probably the legal father of at least the older two since he was married to Rowe when they were born. It sounds like his white dermatologist was the sperm donor. Those kids have a right to know their actual biological parentage for medical reasons. They also have a right to know their mother. At a minimum, a judge should order that she have regular visitation and that a counselor be appointed to help with the reunification process with Rowe and the kids. If Rowe gets custody, the judge should order regular visits with the little brother and any of the Jacksons the kids were close to.

Connie Connie in Wisconsin
July 2, 2009 11:04 PM

My sympathies lie with Rowe in this case, as she is (apparently) the actual mother of the children. It seems she was paid to bear them and then paid to abandon them. You can say that no real mother would accept any amount of money in exchange for her children, but it's happened countless times in the past. The rich can always buy what they want. Rowe seems like a pathetic woman with mental health and self esteem issues, but if we took away the children of all mothers with those problems, there wouldn't be enough homes to take them in.

(Stories about her always crack me up because I know a woman with the same name.)

public defender
July 3, 2009 8:13 AM

Let's hope the judge making this decision has the wisdom and courage to do it right. Deciding custody issues has got to be one of the hardest jobs a judge can do. When numerous people make claims to be a kid's custodian, someone has to decide, and that someone is usually a judge. The judge has to sort through partially true/partially false testimony and guess who's telling the truth and who would make the better parent for the kid.

Judges are human. They make mistakes. But when a judge deciding custody of a child messes up, he messes up the kids. Tough job. It's one I'm glad I don't have.

silver
July 3, 2009 10:17 AM

I vote for the 2nd named, Diana Ross. Her kids turned out OK, and she doesn't need the money, and is less likely to act out of a need for it.

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

About Crunchy Con

Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Crunchy Con

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.