Kelly Rutherford’s estranged husband is mad she didn’t tell him about baby’s birth

tori 040307
Kelly Rutherford and Daniel Giersch on 3/3/07. Credit: WENN.com

Gossip Girl star Kelly Rutherford, 40, just gave birth to her second child, a girl she named Helena, on Monday. Rutherford is in the process of divorcing her second husband, 34 year-old German businessman Daniel Giersch, who is presumably the baby’s father. She filed for divorce last December, and the two have fought over custody issues with their son Hermés, two and a half, in the interim. The last we heard they were arguing over potty training philosophies, with Giersch trying to toilet train Hermes while Rutherford thought it was too much stress for the boy. They eventually agreed to let Hermes wear pull-up diapers until he was ready to start using the potty.

Despite some minor agreements in court, it looks like these don’t yet have an amicable relationship. Giersch has released a frustrated statement that his estranged wife failed to inform him about the birth of his daughter, and explained that he had to find out about it through the press like everyone else.

The Gossip Girl star welcomed her second child, daughter Helena, on Monday, but the actress’s estranged husband, German entrepreneur Daniel Giersch, tells PEOPLE he was never notified of the birth, and instead read about it in online reports, some unfavorable toward him.

“Media reports claiming that I neglected to attend my daughter’s birth are total lies and fabrication,” Giersch says in a statement. “I was never informed by Kelly about the birth of our daughter, nor was I invited to attend. In fact, I found out about it through Internet reports like everyone else. Although this sickens me, I am of course overjoyed that our baby was born healthy. I would’ve wanted nothing more than to hold our newborn daughter for a few moments, and I only seek to coparent both our children responsibly and with love.”

Giersch says he had a verbal agreement with Rutherford that she would notify him by phone or text message of her labor, hospitalization, and the child’s birth – which he alleges never happened.

According to Rutherford’s publicist Jill Fritzo, “The doctors advised that no one be in the birthing room; [Daniel] was notified when [Helena] was born and was immediately invited to come see her.”

Rutherford, 40, and Giersch, 34, are currently mired in a custody dispute over their 2-year-old son, Hermes.

[From People]

What a snotty statement that guy put out. He could have been more delicate about it if he really cared about his new daughter and wants a relationship with her. Instead, he had to get all defensive and get his digs in at Rutherford. I would bet there are plenty of legitimate reasons why she doesn’t want to deal with her children’s father. She must be going through a lot at this time and it couldn’t have been easy to file for divorce while she was pregnant. I feel for her and although she should have told the father I can see why she would want some peace after she just gave birth. There are two sides to every story though and no wonder Giersch is mad if he feels completely shut out of his new daughter’s life.

Hermes and his dad, Daniel Giersch, are shown out on 4/6/09. kelly Rutherford is shown out on 6/1/09. Credit: Fame Pictures.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

32 Responses to “Kelly Rutherford’s estranged husband is mad she didn’t tell him about baby’s birth”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. maraccas says:

    Sorry, I’m “Team Giersch” on this one!

    I guess I’ve found it very hard to like Kelly Rutherford ever since she walked out on her first husband when he became desperately ill (and subsequently died) because she wasn’t the caring type. “In sickness and in health” indeed…

  2. sketches says:

    sorry, can’t back your play on this one, celebitchy. throughout this unseemly affair Rutherford has definitely seemed like the loon.

  3. Cinderella says:

    What is the real deal on this situation? Did he step out or did she? Is the baby his?

    Something’s really odd about the way this is being handled. It’s so spiteful, which leads me to believe one of them screwed up big time.

  4. Celebitchy says:

    I haven’t followed this case as closely as I should have. Please send some links maraccas and sketches so I can see the other side of the story. Thanks!

  5. Tess says:

    She was completely forgettable on a soap (think it was Guiding Light) that I was hooked on when my children were young.

    The most memorable thing I ever saw her do was an interview, years ago.

    She was stunningly stupid. Dumb as dishwater. Jaw-droppingly so.

  6. boo says:

    They are both acting like A-holes. She should have let him know about the birth of the baby.

    He shouldn’t have put out a statement about her failure to do so.

  7. Nina says:

    Perhaps he is not a baby’s bio father, or Kelly wasn’t sure. Kelly evidently doesn’t love him.

  8. Codzilla says:

    maraccas: Excellent point.

    Daniel looks like he’s about 12 years old.

  9. Aspen says:

    If she didn’t want to deal with him, she shouldn’t have been screwing him.

    I’m sorry. You don’t get to do that. I don’t even know who these people are, but unless he’s violent, she had no right to do that.

  10. Maddie says:

    @ Nina he might not be the father DNA wise but the law states that a child born from a marriage is the child of the husband, until proven otherwise.

    I think it’s a bitchy thing of her to do either way, and I hope this comes back to bite her in the ass.

  11. Mahalia says:

    I found myself siding with Kelly until I read your comment maraccas. It would be interesting to know more about this.

  12. Caligirl says:

    I think it was wrong of her not invite or call him to witness the birth of their daughter. I’m siding with the husband on this one, he had a right to see her and while yes his statement seems rude, I imagine he’s hurt, mad and above all anxious to see his daughter. I like Kelly but I’m starting to wonder if he’s not justified in some of his claims.

  13. Moore says:

    I’m on the estranged husband’s side also.
    After reading about her first marriage, I’m appalled. He got sick and needed her and she took off. They weren’t even married a year. It may sound wrong, but maybe all she wanted this time around was a sperm donor.

  14. Tazina says:

    By the time these children are adults, they will be traumatized, exhausted, bitter and worn down from the fighting and custody disputes of their immature parents. There’s a good chance they will be in therapy. No doubt the bank accounts of the two litigants will be depleted from hauling each other to court. If they don’t get their act together now and come together amicably for the sake of the children, the next years are going to be life wasting and horrific for all involved.

  15. RobN says:

    He only put out a statement because her camp was telling the media that he didn’t show up for the birth. Not cool. This stupid excuse about the doctor not wanting others in the birthing room, also ridiculous. Dads are always welcome unless there is some special issue. The special issue here is that Rutherford is a bitch.

  16. Gigohead says:

    That’s pretty sad that this man was shut out of his daughter’s birth. Just because they are divorcing, doesn’t mean she can divorce him as a father to her kids.

    The same thing happened to my brother, he and his wife split before their son was born and she and her father forbid him to see his son and our family. They went as far as taking him to Ireland where we didn’t see him for close to two years.

    In a reversal of fortune, she lost custody of her son when she came back from the states, due to mental illness and now we have him. Now she is only restricted to 1 hour a week visit.

    If Kelly doesn’t believe in Karma, well..she may learn soon.

  17. Linda says:

    Geez – what ever happened to “father’s rights”? What a shame that this woman felt so little for her child as to have her father involved! Yes, I realize that this was the birth – but it all starts on day one and she was a real shrew for not allowing him to be there for his daughter.

  18. KDRockstar says:

    Whatevs. She named the child using both of their last names, so I think that shows a commitment to co-parenting.

  19. LT says:

    wow, how things change. I was around them both when Hermes (why did they do that to him???) was a baby. they were all lovey dovey, I miss you, I love you over the phone, he was out of the country on business, I thought to myself, ‘what a perfect marraige…they have it all’…NOT!! Now this turn of events, never envy anyone, you don’t really know what’s going on, do you??

  20. OXA says:

    He told radaronline that her atorney called Tueday morning and told him,he then tells other sources that he was not told. Before she gave birth he was granted visitation with his daughter,1 hour 3 times a week. He chose instead of seeing the newborn, to get attorneys involved and speak to the press.
    The kids are the ones that will suffer while they bicker.

  21. Iggles says:

    @ Gigohead

    That’s a sad story. But its true, karma is a b*tch.

    I’m glad that your brother can see his son now that he has custody.

    As for Kelly, we don’t know the circumstances of their breakup. But unless he’s a molestor or is part of a child trafficking ring, there’s absolute no excuse for her cutting him out of their kids’ lives! It’s wrong that he wasn’t at the hospital. Even if she didn’t want him in the room, he should have been told so he could see the child in the nursery.

    She’s being a witch.

  22. Maizieloo says:

    It’s so sad that people like this are allowed to bring children into this world. As an adult child of a highly acrimonious divorce, it is heartbreaking that they are screwing this child up from birth – both of their children will have a painful legacy that they will drag with them through their entire lives, and it was through no fault of their own. Whatever their beef is with each other, it’s unfortunate that they are too selfish to put the emotional and physical needs of their children first, rather than play an endless game of spite and tit-for-tat. I don’t care who did what to whom – you have a parent here who WANTS to be a part of their child’s life, but instead is being shut out simply for the sake of being hateful. The second you got knocked up, the world ceased to be all about you, honey. It all makes me so sick – their kids should be taken away.

  23. lrm says:

    she should have informed him about the birth,BUT he does NOT have the right to be ‘at the birth’,unless the woman who is IN LABOR,people!!! wants him there.
    Jesus-it’s ridiculous how PC people sound ‘he has a right to be at the birth,blah blah’.
    Um,excuse me,women don’t have to have men they are with at the birth,nevermind someone she is estranged from!
    Seriously,think,people-she’s IN LABOR.
    Having stress,trauma,unsupportive people is not what a laboring woman or baby needs!!!!
    You’re not really worried about someone elses’ ‘feelings’ when your vagina is being stretched 10cm and a human being is being propelled forth.

  24. cakes says:

    The doctor saying that the father couldn’t be there is crap. And I seriously doubt the MD said it at all.He is the father and yes he does have the right to be there. She should just admit that she didn’t want him there during L&D. What she did was bitchy and making excuses that put someone else in the hot seat is cowardly.

  25. Aspen says:

    Definitely with Irm on the idea that she didn’t need to allow him watch the birth. AT ALL.

    But…she’s a total jerk for leaving him ignorant of the birth.

  26. EvilWombatQueen says:

    I agree with Irm. The woman giving birth runs the show during delivery. If she doesn’t want the father there then he doesn’t get to be there regardless of divorce, separation or if they only got married the day before. My dad missed my birth because mum told him to leave the delivery theatre and they were happily maried! Given that I know women who have screamed blue murder at the men *they love* during labour I have no idea why this crazy man thinks he has a god given right to be there, or that it would be a pleasant experience for either of them if he had been there.

    That said, she should have alerted him after the birth, through a lawyer if she felt unable to speak to him in person.

  27. barneslr says:

    “I think it was wrong of her not invite or call him to witness the birth of their daughter.”

    She should have told him about the birth immediately after, but he had no right to be in the delivery room to witness the birth. When a woman is giving birth, it is all about what is going to be best for her and the baby. She should not have anyone in the delivery room with her that she does not want, most especially someone who upsets her. The father does not have any specific “right” to actually witness the birth.

    However, once the baby was born, he should have been allowed to be there to meet his newborn daughter.

  28. martina says:

    I would like to add to the comment by maracas. He is right Kelly did this terrible thing to her first husband-Carlos Tarajano. He died in 2004. He has a page on Facebook. I think she used her second husband for sperm. She doesn’t love anyone.

  29. sue d says:

    I really don’t respect her after leaving her first husband, six months into a marriage, when he became sick with a heart condition. I think she is
    an awful person.