I have been following the continuing saga of who will get custody of Michael Jackson’s children. I even had the privilege of appearing on ABC World News to add my thoughts to the other talking heads theorizing about what may occur in this real life custody drama.
The more I hear and read, the more disturbing the case becomes. As in all custody cases, the custody award will be based upon the best interests of the children.
In most cases between a parent and a third person, it is presumed that it would be in the best interests of the children to be with the parent. In this case, the three children have two biological mothers, the identity of only one is known. Regardless, I believe no court would ever consider splitting the children up.
I would have serious concerns about Debbie Rowe, the biological mother of Prince Michael and Paris, having custody of the children. She voluntarily relinquished (for a large payment) custody of the children. Moreover, following the death of the father, she sat on the “sideline” considering whether she even wants to pursue seeking custody of the children. Seems to me a mother truly concerned about the welfare of her children would not take over two weeks to consider her options.
Even more disturbing are the reports that she does not consider herself the parent of the children. . The New York Post quotes Rowe as saying:
Do I want the kids? Hell no. . .
"I'm not going after custody. These kids are not mine. They never were mine. They were always Michael's.
The alternative choice, Michael’s mother Katherine Jackson, is equally disturbing. Michael accused his father of abusing him when he was a child. Hence, the question - where was Katherine while Michael was being abused? If she idly sat by and permitted the abuse to occur, is she not as complicit as the actual abuser? Should Michael’s children potentially be exposed to the same abuse?
In any event, all we can do is sit back and watch what happens. Stay tuned.