I really take no interest in Michael Jackson’s life (so this blog is a rare event), but I do wonder about his children (to be honest my heart breaks each time I see pictures of those kids) and that is the reason I am breaking my no-blogs-on-Michael-Jackson-rule.
According to news reports, Jackson and his ex-wife Deborah Rowe have just settled their lengthy legal battle over custody and visitation rights for their two children. While attorneys would not disclose the details of the settlement they would say that it involves monetary payments to Rowe and visitation rights with the children Michael Joseph Jackson Jr., known as Prince Michael, and Paris Michael Katherine Jackson.
Jackson’s lawyer told reporters, “I think both parties are satisfied. He (Jackson) seems to be satisfied with the result.”
The part I found interesting about the lawsuit (besides the fact that it was a byproduct of the 2003 charges filed against Jackson alleging child molestation) was that it revealed that Rowe had relinquished all of her parental rights to the children when the two divorced. It just makes me wonder what circumstances were present that made her come to such a decision. Barring any psychological, drug related, or financial issues (Rowe claims she didn’t suffer from any of these), what mother would voluntarily give up rights to her child? Rowe may have wondered the same thing because according to court documents, she changed her mind about seeing her children after Jackson’s arrest.
“Everything changed,” Rowe said in a declaration. She also revealed that she regretted having given up her rights to see the children.
After this legal battle she likely regrets hooking up with the pop star all together. You’ll recall that Rowe and Jackson were married in 1996 and she filed for divorce in 1999. The divorce became final in 2000. A year later, Rowe filed to terminate her parental rights and the court accepted her declaration in which she praised Jackson’s parenting skills and said, “I want to forever give up any and all rights pertaining to the children because I believe that by doing so, it is in the children’s best interest.”
Keep in mind she said this despite the fact that Jackson had allowed her visitation rights only if she went to distant locations such as Geneva and South Africa. (Red Flag, Red Flag.) Only after Jackson’s arrest in 2003 did Rowe file for temporary custody alleging that she “became concerned that during the criminal case, Jackson would be too distracted to care for the children.” She also said she was disturbed by his association with the Nation of Islam, whose leader she believed was anti-Semitic.
After Jackson’s trial ended in an acquittal last year he left the country with the children and according to court records Rowe says she hasn’t seen her kids since. Perhaps, now she will get the chance, though at this point I can’t imagine the irreparable damage these children have already suffered with an eccentric (to say the least) father and a mother who has been absent for much of their lives. (I told you my heart breaks for those kids.) And lest we forget Jackson’s third child, Prince Michael II, whose mother has not been identified. I wonder what will become of him?