twitter facebook stumble upon rss

Debbie Rowe: Unfit Mother?

sign up for the momlogic newsletter Tweet This
Ms. Rowe was simply a surrogate, not a "Mommy"!

Dr. Michelle Golland: I was astonished when I heard that Debbie Rowe, biological surrogate mother of two of the Jackson children, is even considering fighting for custody. I truly wonder what she wants at this point in time. For all intents and purposes, she has not been in these children's lives for many years. Let's just say what she really was ... she was the surrogate for Michael Jackson and has never been their mother! She reports they have never called her Mommy, and after the divorce with Michael Jackson, she was given over 8 million dollars to go away for good.

Debie Rowe

After her foul-mouthed public outbursts toward a cameraman the other day, I truly question her judgment. It is very suspicious that she is now concerned about the kids -- if she had truly been concerned about the welfare of the children prior to MJ's death, you think she would have intervened earlier. My advice to Ms. Rowe is that she bow out with as much grace as she can muster or we will continue to see her being bleeped on all the talk shows.

As a surrogate mother, Debbie Rowe should have no legal rights to these children. I have many friends who have used surrogates due to fertility issues. I know they would be horrified if the woman who carried their children came back with some claims of parental rights. MJ obviously did not want anything more to do with Debbie Rowe because he made explicit instructions in his will against giving her any money. He clearly stated he wanted first, his mother, and second, Diana Ross to be the guardians of his three children.

As a clinical psychologist, I must say the issue of guardianship should not be an issue of biology or age, but whether or not the person truly has the best interests of these three innocent children at heart. It is also extremely important that we see Michael Jackson's directives in his will are followed, both in regard to custody of his children and in regard to executorship of his will. If his wishes are not carried out, it will be as much of an injustice as his death.

Do you think Debbie Rowe should get the kids? Comment below.


next: Second-Time Baby Showers?
48 comments so far | Post a comment now
Sheila July 12, 2009, 7:19 PM

Debbie Rowe has no rights to the children. It was a business arrangement. She did not want them. She was paid well. Joe Jackson did beat up Michael. But I don’t think he lives with his wife so that won’t be a problem. Michael should have his will respected.

Rose July 12, 2009, 11:08 PM

I think the children should have the chance at a halfway normal life, not like Micheal.He never got to have that with a family. He was their free ticket to ride, and now it looks like his children are going to carry the ride on. If you leave it up to Joe Jackson. The one man MJ hated and did not want around himself or his kids. Go ahead Courts put them in the same hands MJ was in and see how there future turns out.

Suzee July 13, 2009, 12:46 AM

What a mess for a judge to figure. The 3 kids need to stay together. At first, I was no way on Debbie Rowe. But, then we keep hearing reports of Michael who said he had a lonely, sad childhood. His dad abused and tormented him. Did his mother stand idly by and allow this abuse to happen? Michael said growing up he missed out on Christmas and birthday celebrations. And whose fault was that? Katherine Jackson’s, Jehovah’s Witness and complicit co-parent. As moms, we know it’s almost always mothers who make these occasions grand and meaningful for our kids. The woman is 79. Is she really capable of giving her grandkids the happy childhood she did not give Michael? What happens to them if she doesn’t live another year? Joe going to care for them? Also, if Debbie were to get the kids, then die, who would be her backup? What a patchwork parenting those kids will have. Separately, bio parents have a ton of weight, as you do w/ your own. Repeatedly, courts grant crack-rehabbed single mothers control of their kids from stable , two parent families. Katherine needs to kick Joe to the curb for half a chance.

Cheryl July 13, 2009, 12:58 AM

In the eyes of the law, Debbie Rowe wasn’t a surrogate. How? She and MJ had been married. Yes, it was a business arrangement, but to the law it’s cut and dried. The two eldest children were born into wedlock. DR and MJ divorced after several years. She was given a divorce settlement and their arrangement was he had custody. It is very, very difficult to label a parent as unfit and a judge declared her case did not meet the criteria. One of those criteria is a parent’s chronic drug abuse. Which parent could have been declared unfit in that regard?….MJ.

sue July 13, 2009, 9:59 PM

Wow, Suzee and Cheryl, I loved reading your thought-provoking and intelligent comments. I was beginning to worry about some of these people, but you two really cut thru the BS, and clarified much!

Anonymous July 15, 2009, 4:14 PM

Lets be honest here people. That woman in no way wanted these kids. They are 12 years old. Because you lay down and produce children does not make you a mother. That makes you a donor. People use surrogates in this country all the time. Debbie Rowe was not paid for her divorce settlement 8 million that was seperate. The 8 million was for her kids. So to believe an 11 and 12 year old are going to wake up and call her momma is crazy and ridiculous. If she wanted to be a mother I am sure she would have exercised that right by now.

Now I don’t agree that Joe Jackson should be the perosn in charge either. He is a poor misguided soul who has issues. But when someone dies there wishes are to be honored.

She only has rights to 2 of the 3 kids and so should they be seperated. No, because ultimately she will not get blanket in any way. He is not hers. Also, the court will ask the kids they are old enough to have a say so.. Do you think they are going to say let me go with a stranger.. Ummm… I dont think so…

DivaD July 18, 2009, 12:12 PM

Heck, she got the kids hiding in that big azz chin she has!!! She really do not need or even want custody of those children..they don’t look anything like her azz either!!!

Tammy, Humble, Texas July 19, 2009, 1:01 PM

I agree Debbie Rowe was simply a SURROGATE. She is only in it for the MONEY. She should be ashamed of herself. If these children go to her then what’s the purpose of a will???? A will is SUPPOSE to be what WILL take place after one dies….. What is happening here????? By her own admission she said that the children call her Miss Debbie…. Well, why would a MOTHER want to be addressed by her own children by her first name???…. It’s simple…. She doesn’t want to be their mother….. Debbie Rowe should get a life of her own and continue to take care of her horses…..Debbie Rowe filed with the courts to give up her parental rights and that’s how it should stand….She also said these children were a gift to Michael….Besides it’s not fair for the children to be separated and shame on the courts if this happens…Debbie Rowe GO AWAY…….MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL.

fridah September 18, 2009, 6:42 PM

I wonder why pple are afraid of Joe being near the kids, he is an old man now.Prince and Paris are above ten and there is nothing he can do to them.They are strong enough to challenge them.

fridah September 18, 2009, 6:58 PM

Dr Golland instead of you being concerned about Debbie, i have a burning issue concerning MJ’s drug use.What really happened in btn with the kids? meaning when he was high.Coz have ever lived near drug addicts and there was one who raped a 3 months year old girl.Please dont get me wrong ,am just concern.It gives an idea that we shall never come to know every thing about MJ.Please dont question my consience coz as a mother some times i get scared and keep wondering if the kids were………oops molested.
Thats way i think Debbie might have been a surrogate, he knew Michael from head to toe.I dont think she would have left her biological kids to someone who was under the influence of drugs.
Lets not loose heart maybe in future they will open up like their dad and tell the world what used to take place.Guys just imagine someone being on drugs since 1993?

payday loan online December 10, 2010, 5:34 AM

Wow, that’s quite a nice read!

payday loan December 10, 2010, 6:01 AM

Intriguing article. I realize I’m just a little late in posting my comment but the article ended up being the and merely the info I had been looking for. I can’t say i accept all you mentioned nevertheless it was emphatically fascinating! BTW…I found your website by using a Google search. I’m a frequent visitor to your blog all of which will return again soon.

instant payday loans December 10, 2010, 8:37 AM

Each time I visit this great site there’s new things and improved will be able to study from. Haha I’ve held it’s place in your source code too many times to master how you’re doing some things so i could use them my site. Thanks! I can teach you about ways to easy.

online payday loans December 13, 2010, 3:27 PM

Certainly together with your thoughts here and i also like your site! I’ve bookmarked it to ensure that I can go back & read more down the road.

cash advance loans December 13, 2010, 3:52 PM

Hi just thought i might inform you something.. This really is twice now i’ve landed in your blog within the last 15 days looking for totally unrelated things. Spooky or what?

payday loan online December 13, 2010, 6:21 PM

Hello, I found your blog in a very new directory of blogs. I don’t recognize how your website came up, will need to have been a typo. Your blog looks good, have a very nice day.

no fax payday loans December 14, 2010, 9:55 AM

I’d been just browsing here and there along with to see this post. I have to admit that i’m within the hand of luck today otherwise getting this kind of excellent post to learn wouldn’t are already achievable for me, at least. Really appreciate your articles.

same day payday loans December 14, 2010, 10:21 AM

Thank you for making the effort to debate this, I find myself strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If at all possible, because you gain expertise, could you mind updating your site with extra information? It’s very great for me.

payday loans December 14, 2010, 12:43 PM

I had been just browsing in some places along with to read this post. I must say that we are from the hand of luck today if not getting such an excellent post to learn to read wouldn’t are achievable personally, no less than. Really appreciate your content.

same day payday loans December 25, 2010, 4:15 PM

I’ve recently started a blog, the details you provide on this web site has reduced the problem tremendously. We appreciate you all of your time & work…


Back to top >>
advertisement