News Home Exclusives Celebrity Music Movie TV Videos
Slideshows Hot or Not? TV Recaps Fashion Interviews Celeb Birthdays

Debbie Rowe: 'I Want My Kids'

July 2nd, 2009 3:22pm EDT Post a comment

Michael Jackson's ex-wife Debbie Rowe

Michael Jackson's ex-wife Debbie Rowe has added to the controversies surrounding the death of the pop superstar by insisting, "I want my kids."

Read more!

31 Member Comments

Page down to comment | Original Story

Thu Jul 2 2009 15:44:58 By: Tom Sizemore (

18677)
"I Want My Kids"
That's what Michael has been saying for the last 30 years, it just wasn't about custody.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 15:48:02 By: Tom Sizemore (

18677)
*cracks knuckles*
Thanks grim, it's been a long week!

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 15:54:18 By: cat27 (

1967)
Is she referring to the kids she was paid to have for MJ? The kids she willingly left with MJ (or a price)?
Whatever.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 16:04:31 By: Marcus Garvey (

4196)
i believe shes referring to the kids who have half of her dna and NONE of michael jackson's

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 16:21:12 By: cat27 (

1967)
^And yet she STILL gave to him for money.
DNA ain't everything Marcus.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 16:25:27 By: trek (

192)
Just Keep joe jackson away from them!
He looks at them with money signs in his eyes.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 17:10:27 By: Blues_Lover (

2083)
DNA and Love MATTER yet have been continually put on the backseat in The American Millenium. Money appears to prevent real parentage and love from existence in the American Court Systems. I understand only too well what and how money can acquire children in the Court Room where lies and money fuel a neverending battle to ensue, in this case involving also, Neverland. Sometimes, a real parent has stepped down, continuing to pay support, yet been harassed to give up any and all visitation, financially broken, emotionally drained and heartbroken, just to give their child a life that involves less dissention and not traveling back and forth in schoolife, social, academics and differing home values in discipline and nurturing. ~ May the REAL PARENT Please stand up.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 17:19:35 By: cat27 (

1967)
@ blueslover...Tell that to the many foster and adoptive parents who are more parents to their kids than the DNA-donors ever thought of being.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 17:22:37 By: Blues_Lover (

2083)
I agree in some cases, yet in other cases the child never even meets with professionals alone who are expected to determine what is "best" yet are chosen and paid by the ones with more money, or dictated to be paid by the ones who "lose..."

This beautiful child who complained about visits to a natural parent, never wanted to return again and never lived there AT ALL for the first, impressionable, near decade years of life...and returned from visits at the non-custodials in tantrums and unusual temperament, requiring a psychologist at an early age.

I do think an 8 year-old knows what is in his or her heart, by then. Yet, money and Corporate Attorneys end up wielding power where power should NOT exist, and influencing Judges, who admit to "friendships" with Family Evaluators chosen by ONE side, prior to their Court Decisions, 2 days into 4-day Court Battles...

I do not have the answers but there is harassment and undue influence linked to finances that has kept many good, biological parents from parenting their children yet they have signed away rights and/or keep paying support.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 17:29:01 By: nicerack (

8973)
Gold digger!

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 18:18:59 By: trek (

192)
let's see if she is willing to take them without the benifit of Child support. She should have enough money to care for them on her own.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 18:59:47 By: SOME_GIRL (

3361)
I didn't know her paternity..or eh...maternity was in question...only the fact that she gave them up.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 20:01:17 By: cat27 (

1967)
Blueslover......he hired her to have the kids which make her a surrogate in essence. The marriage was never a REAL marriage and no one ever pretended it was (well, for long anyway). She is looking for a nice chunk of a multi million dollar estate...NOT kids otherwise she would have kept joint custody....as was her right...all along.
And what do any of you references to those kids (real or not) whose case you mention above have to do with MJ's kids??

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 20:02:16 By: cat27 (

1967)
"Debbie Rowe: I want my Kash!"

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 20:15:10 By: cat27 (

1967)
@ Somegirl...there is some woman claiming now to be the mother of all 3 kids.

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 20:21:12 By: cat27 (

1967)
^LOTS of carrion her to pick over!

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 22:02:36 By: mydestiny (

2)
debbie rowe u should have never given up ur parental rights for a few dollars. children are priceless..alot of people in this world cant have kids and here u go taking urz for granted. u do not deserve those children. u r just in it for the money.,u r a trifling bi.ch. leave those kids alone. u r only coming around now because MJ did not regard u as nothing in his will.. i thank god he did that. anyone who sells their child does not deserve to have them

[Report]

Thu Jul 2 2009 22:55:59 By: d0nt _j0ck_my_shet (

243)
omg smh -sighsz-

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 00:05:51 By: k-u-s-h (

129)
When you give up your rights as a parent, they're gone! So how can she come up now and think she has a say in anything involving Michael Jacksons kids?!

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 02:13:43 By: RINDY (

200)
This is all about money. When she got on tv years ago saying I'm doing this to make Michael happy. She let and gave Michael permission to keep and have the children. He paid her to have those kids and she took the money willingly. Michael never had his kids around Joe Jackson. Why would his mother now having the kids have them around Joe Jackson? Ms Rowe doesn't know nothing about her kids, if they are hers. She did not want the kids at all. Michael left her out of his will so she's mad and think by getting the two oldest ones she will get some money. If she gets those kids they are going to give her HELL because they know she is a gold digger.Michael Joseph and Katherine are not dumb at all kids can see right through adults. Ms Rowe is going to wish she had left them alone when they get through with her.Since they couldn't get the kids away from Michael before now they are going to try to talk Ms. Rowe into getting the children. The same ones who try to get the children taken away from him the first time. Michael is dead now so they are going to bring Joe Jackson in the picture because Michael mom has the children. No one has noticed Joe Jackson does his own thing and the rest of the Jackson family don't pay him any mind.They dont even speak of his name.

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 04:43:01 By: Elena1972 (

1)
why now debbie! why didn't you fight for the kids in the BEGINNING..you didn't care 'cos you just wanted MJ's money. get a life and leave MJ's kids alone...now you are saying that the kids are not Michael's! who cares, MJ raised those kids all by himself without your help...sorry BUT you are not in MJ's WILL..TOO BAD...Katherine Jackson can look after her grandchildren now...way better than you **** and let MICHAEL JACKSON REST IN PEACE!

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 05:03:30 By: hatsoff2us (

1972)
@Cat27, thank you--I mirror your opinion on this issue, and she didn't give up her rights once, but twice. She doesn't WANT her children, she just Wants MONEY.

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 05:29:44 By: hatsoff2us (

1972)
And?

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 07:57:57 By: crab68 (

2)
Which kids she talks about.Put some mercury on her face or some concentrated HCL. Rotten Egg wants now billion out of his death.

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 09:31:01 By: hatsoff2us (

1972)
Do you think either of those women married Michael out of love or lust? Do you think sex was ever involved? They both had an agenda. Debbie for the money (via selling her children) and Lisa for continued fame. I read/heard on the news, Truth777, that Debbie said the children were a "GIFT" to Michael and has not been in their lives since their births (btw, he paid her very generously for the "GIFTS") and that does not = "mother". Imo, if the Will is truth and not fabricated, it should remain as so: His mother raising them if possible or Diana Ross.

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 13:03:10 By: mindlover956 (

3)
The death of MJ has become a circus. Every roach in the world is coming out of the cracks to make a farce out of his death. They should all be ashamed of their disrespect for the dead. This is a desecration. Yes that even includes members of his very own family. I guess this proves that theory. The only thing that survives a nuclear attack is... ROACHES!

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 21:27:39 By: eautry (

2)
I DO NOT THINK SHE SHOULD GET THE KIDS,CAUSE THE KIDS DO NOT KNOW HER PLUS SHE GAVE UP ALL RIGHTS FROM THE KIDS? SHE DOSE NOT DESERVE THEM,SHE WAITS AFTER MICHAEL IS GONE TO DO THIS,I HOPE SHE DON"T GET THEM MICHAEL MOTHER WILL DO FINE RAISING THEM AND IF NOT DIAHA ROSS WILL?

[Report]

Fri Jul 3 2009 21:33:11 By: eautry (

2)
DEBBIE ROWE IF SHE IS GOING TO GET SOME MONEY AND THAT IS ALL IS AFTER AND SHE DOES NOT DESERVE TO DO MICHAEL"S DAD LIKE THAT,SHE DON"T HAVE NO ROOM TO TALK?

[Report]

Sat Jul 4 2009 11:30:56 By: Blues_Lover (

2083)
cat27, good point in the difference between a surrogate for money and an unexpected/unplanned pregnancy. Still, I mention not to be too hasty, as SOME who LOVE their children (even YES born out of wedlock) and were BROKEN in a Court Room by very clever and creative Attorneys (or teams of family corporate attorney affiliates) who NEVER wanted to LOSE ANY Parenting Custody OR Visitation...though one might think parenting is a right...as you say.
Parenting is a gift, not a right. You have to be better than the other parent when the battle goes to the Court Room. Or the Attorneys have to present the case so you APPEAR BETTER...to WIN the children.
This makes me sooo SAD, as CHILDREN become a pawn in financial situations...rather than regarded and nurtured and revered and loved...and may wind up unable to see their natural parent or know them, for YEARS.

[Report]

Sat Jul 4 2009 11:46:55 By: Calling Elvis (

292)
I have to think this Debbie Rowe is in it for that "big payday." If she were paid only to be a surrogate for Michael Jackson's brood, why does she think that she will gain custody of the kids and, possibly, custody of the rights to his estate? She didn't want the kids before this. What does she think the attorneys involved will conclude? It will be a travesty if they let her even make a motion for the kids now. And furthermore, NEITHER JOE, SR., AND MICHAEL'S MOTHER SHOULD BE GIVEN CUSTODY OF THE CHILDREN. Joe, Sr., is an unfit, hypocritical, narcissistic, patronizing, money - grubbing child abuser and the mother is just too old to manage those children now.

[Report]

Sat Jul 4 2009 19:09:53 By: Blues_Lover (

2083)
I AGREE Lisa-Marie HEAY it Rhymes! Give Us Janet Jackson or parent/goddaughter Nicole Richie or someone sensible like Alicia Keys, someone like that. :D

[Report]