Comments on: TMZ: Debbie Rowe is not the biological mother of Jackson’s two oldest kids

By: paranel

paranel — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:57:21 +0000

Biological parent. real parent, fake parent. What is with all these rubbish words? Whoever raised you, loved you, nourtured and took care of you is your parent. Stop making it sound like sperm or egg donation equals being a parnet.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Rojer

Rojer — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 03:34:04 +0000

I don’t think Debbie Rowe even knows what a surrogate mother is exactly. I wonder if Brooke Shields is the biological mother of Paris. Paris kind of looks like Brooke Shields now. Brooke Shields emotional speech at Michael Jackson’s funeral making me suspicious she might me the biological mother. Father I am unsure of but it is possible the children appear completely white probably due to Michael Jackson’s pigmentation disease was already full blown way before the children are born. The third child I think he is definately his as I do see some of Michael Jackson’s features but I am also noticing some features look like they are coming from Lisa Marie Pressely.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Ursula

Ursula — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 05:48:18 +0000

Funny but I think those kids look like Debbie, the little girl especially.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: gg

gg — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 03:33:55 +0000

To which I hasten to add:

Maybe the Court system will start to make limits on this flagrant misuse of made to order conception. What with Octopussy and MJ’s shenanegans – it’s a sad, sad situation when people “make” children, just to put them in a questionable life situations.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Rosanna

Rosanna — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:12:58 +0000

Happymom, I understand you hold that opinion, but… what about women who decide to give up the baby to adoption? According to what you say, it shouldn’t be possible while in fact it does happen, and fairly often!

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: DD

DD — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:12:20 +0000

I always thought the whole fertility treatment thing was about having your own biological baby. So why on earth would you choose to have a baby where there is no biological mother or father involved? It’s almost like birthing an orphan. I don’t get the incentive here.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: princess pee

princess pee — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:21:43 +0000

If the surrogate mother of ‘Blanket’ is unknown, how do we know what she did or did not know about the person getting her child? This is bull.

One good thing, though: this will really open up people eyes about the law and lines of parentage. I bet most of us don’t know much about it, but we will soon enough. And it will certainly have people talking about IVF and other fertility treatments (though I’m not sure that’s a good thing, some people are dinks).

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: JustV

JustV — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:42:22 +0000

The whole issue of the birth/purchase of these children is very disturbing. It is always scary to recognize the vast, seemingly unlimited power of the rich!

I don’t think that it could be argued that MJ didn’t love his children, but it is also obvious that he should not have been the custodial parent to them.

And I have to second gg’s comment that it is very creepy that MJ has been bleaching/dying at least one of the children’s hair for so long. It just another piece being piled onto the crap heap of a life that MJ created with unstable living environment, constantly moving, his drug use/addictions, etc. In all of this, when and how did these kids receive a formal education? If MJ couldn’t maintain housekeeping services, was he really paying tutors to educate his children? Just a thought.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Dirty Martini

Dirty Martini — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:11:45 +0000

Lets see, so much to say.

First and foremost, these are the children of Michael Jackson regardless of whose egg, sperm, DNA was contributed. While I could get snarky as the day is long about his motivations and fit for fatherhood, he is–nonetheless–the father of these children in the only way that matters.

Having said that: this is a freak show in the making, much like the last half of the man’s life. I have no doubt that it will come out to be true. It makes sense that its true in that NOTHING about Michael Jackson makes sense, and why should this?

And this shows the really crazy side of artificial reproductive technologies. When we start making babies in test tubes, incubating them, and then basically buying and selling them…….to people who have no business being parents……god help us.

And most of all, God help these dear sweet babies who dont deserve this insanity.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: fizXgirl314

fizXgirl314 — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:19:02 +0000

this is really sad… do the kids need to see this? it breaks my heart… they’re his kids… no matter who donated the dna… my heart goes out to those poor children… they’re in for a roller coaster ride of epic proportions

Report this comment as spam or abuse