Brooke Mueller may get full custody of twin boys, whom Denise Richards can’t care for

Here’s yet another chapter in the sad ongoing saga of the fate of Charlie Sheen’s four year-old twin boys, Max and Bob. As you know, the twins’ mother is “former” meth addict Brooke Mueller, who claims to be sober for a whole seven months after her 21st stint in rehab earlier this year. Charlie’s boys have been staying with his other ex wife, Denise Richards. However Denise just wrote a long, heartbreaking letter to the Department of Child and Family Services detailing the reasons why Max and Bob can no longer stay with her.

Basically the boys were doing well when they first started staying with Denise, but they’ve regressed since spending time with their biological mother, who was recently released from rehab. Max and Bob have exhibited disturbing violent behavior including choking and kicking their half sisters and pets. Denise fears that her daughters and dogs will be seriously injured and can no longer take the risk of having the boys at her home. She wrote that she cannot turn her back on them for a moment.

Many of you noted that Denise’s plea may have been an attempt at showing how Brooke has harmed the boys, and Denise may be trying to get them help rather than relinquishing custody. Denise explained that she tried to get a professional assessment for Max and Bob, but that her hands were tied when Brooke refused to let it happen. Brooke also decided that the boys should no longer go to their current pediatrician, but never provided the name of an acceptable replacement. So if Denise has another agenda there could be hope for these boys, but it seems like a long shot.

There’s a new story on Radar Online that makes my stomach hurt. They claim that Brooke has been complying with DCFS’s requests and that she’s likely to get full custody of her boys back by Christmas. *jaw drops*

The latest news in the explosive Brooke Mueller and Charlie Sheen custody battle might be the most shocking yet: has learned that Mueller is on track to get custody of the couple’s twin sons, Bob and Max, by Christmas.

After more than 20 stays in rehab — including two while pregnant — and a 5150 psychiatric hold this May after overdosing on crystal meth, Mueller’s new commitment to her sobriety has impressed the Los Angeles County Department of Child and Family Services, according to insiders, so much so she will soon have her sons back living under her own roof.

As Radar has reported, the boys’ temporary guardian, Denise Richards, recently told DCFS she will no longer care for the children because of their increasingly violent and disturbing behavior.

“Brooke will be awarded custody of the boys by Christmas, as long as she doesn’t relapse,” one source connected to the situation said.

“She has been sober for several months. She hasn’t had one dirty test.

“She has done everything that has been asked of her by DCFS, so at this point, there is absolutely no reason for Brooke not to get her boys back.”

[From Radar Online]

Brooke was in rehab twice when she was pregnant. She’s been in rehab 20 times prior to this latest stint. She hasn’t even been sober a year, she’s counting her time in rehab (during which she switched facilities) as sobriety and yet somehow she’s a fit enough mother to get her kids back. That just blows my mind.

Do you remember how Brooke was taking Charlie Sheen to court for talking smack about her to TMZ? Well she was granted a temporary restraining order and a gag order in a hearing with Charlie yesterday. The judge had some harsh words for Charlie, who had called that same judge a “fatty” in his rant to TMZ. Brooke tried to get visitation rights with the twins suspended for Charlie, but she was denied. She also wants to have Denise Richards removed as her sons temporary guardian.

I don’t blame Brooke for trying to get Charlie to shut up. As for her motivation for getting her boys back, does she really want to care for them or is she motivated by the fat $55,000 a month check that full custody will earn her? I think the answer is abundantly clear. I just hope she stays sober and that she tries to get her sons the help they need. Up until now she’s tried to block Denise’s attempts to have professionals step in. It’s all about the money for her. I really hope that DCFS sees the light, or at least caves to public pressure, and that these boys don’t have to stay with their mother.



Denise Richards is shown with her daughters and with the twins in July, 2013. Brooke Mueller is shown out in September and December, 2012. Credit: FameFlynet

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

164 Responses to “Brooke Mueller may get full custody of twin boys, whom Denise Richards can’t care for”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Shannon1972 says:

    I don’t think I’ve actively hated a celebrity until now. This whole situation makes me sick.

    • gogoGorilla says:


      The whole thing is disgusting, and Charlie is not helping matters with his big mouth.

      I feel really sorry for those boys. I don’t understand the American court system’s insistence that biology makes you the fittest parent.

      • Thiajoka says:

        Exactly! If his mouthing off is making the court more sympathetic to Brooke, and it sounds like it is, then for the sake of his boys he needs to keep his shit intact and not cause anymore trouble for them.

      • Mayamae says:

        As long as children are considered property of their parents, things will never change. The system is broken, but if it wasn’t, and money wasn’t a consideration (as if), children would always be represented by their own attorney who is not answerable to DCFS.

        I think the US is unique in how screwed the system is, because of our unique issues with drug abuse. I’m convinced the problems are intertwined. If we can figure out how to affectively deal with our drug issues, we could more easily get a handle on our foster care system.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      Is she a celebrity?

      But yeah, she makes my stomach turn. I have a lot of empathy for addicts, but the fact that she’s relapsed 20 times and TWICE while pregnant? That combined with her very transparent motivations—-I mean, it’s just inexcusable.

      • Lucinda says:

        I have sympathy for addicts as well but she is not actively trying to care for herself. If she were genuine, she would not be fighting for custody so hard right now. A big part of sobriety is taking responsibility for the damage you cause which she is not doing. So I have nothing but contempt for her.

      • Kiddo says:

        “Is she a celebrity?”

        I had to look up her Wikipedia page (which lists her as “good friends” with Denise, snort) to find out where she came from. I think she is mostly a socialite and hung out with Paris Hilton in the past.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Yeah, unfortunately I think she qualifies as a celebrity. We all know her name, and she makes the news. These days that word does not automatically imply talent or redeeming qualities. See: the kardashian family, and as already mentioned, Paris Hilton.

        As for sympathy for addicts, one of my siblings is an addict who chooses each day whether or not to use drugs. It’s not easy, and I see how he struggles. But at some point, he got older, his kids became more important than drugs and he went to rehab so that he could be in their lives. He’s a loving and involved father. It’s possible, and I’m proud of him for getting clean.

        These boys need a stable home life, or the destructive cycle will likely continue with them. It’s so sad.

    • Suzy from Ontario says:

      This! And DCFS is using no common sense. They need to think about the boys instead of being so quick to put them back with their bio mom. Just because you are the biological parent doesn’t mean you are a good parent. It all makes me sick. These boys need help and DCFS is dooming them if they are placed back with Brooke imo.

    • Camille says:

      There is really something wrong with our society. Why is it always woman vs. woman? Where is the guy? Take Jolie vs. Aniston. Where was Brad Pitt? Now this Denise vs. Brooke. Where is FATHER OF THESE BOYS? He is still alive what I know. Stop f###ing porn stars and take care of your sons you asshole!!! This is just beyond sad and ridicules at the same time.

      • jes_sayin says:

        thank you! I was just going to say this… WHERE IS THE DAD ???? How is HIS responsibility NOT EVEN MENTIONED??

      • Gossy says:

        I don’t think there’s any Denise vs. Brooke going on….everyone is supporting Denise lol.

  2. Dawn says:

    So if that happens who ever made this horrid decision deserves to roast in hell along with Brooke Mueller. I feel so sad for these two little boys who need someone to stand up for them and get them away from that money hungry drug addict.

    • Suzy from Ontario says:

      I completely agree!!!

    • T.C. says:

      I’m so angry I could spit. Ibread the entire letter Denise wrote, those boys are in trouble. The are hitting, choking, slapping, kicking with no remorse to humans and pets then throwing feces around. That is serious psychological damage. They need professional help with a loving home. They ain’t getting any of that with their bio Mom who justs wants the child support to continue her drug habit. Urgh.

      • Liv says:

        I think the boys are deeply confused. Going from a crazy mother to a household with structure and rules must be a shock, but being now exposed to their mother again must make them feel very afraid and helpless. So sad. I wonder what Brooke did to them.

      • japangel says:

        Awful. 🙁 The fact that she did two stints in rehab while pregnant means that the boys were exposed to drugs/alcohol while in utero which can have a devastating effect on their tiny developing brains. So, I’m sure the chaos and instability they have experienced since birth is a huge factor in their behavioral issues but I would bet money that it is also a result of the in-utero exposure. Definitely tragic that little children suffer longterm damage like this…

  3. Ellen says:

    I have no love for Brooke, but you know how else they could be removed from her care? Their father could sue for custody himself. He could have asked for custody from the get-go. He was too busy drugging and f-ing prostitutes to bother.

    Those poor boys have no one. No wonder they’re showing serious signs of RAD and FAS.

    • Amory says:

      No one, and hence foster care, is still better than living with abuse. Doesn’t she have relatives? I’m a little surprised that Charlie’s Sheen’s dad has not stepped up. As for Charlie, I agree. Hard to bemoan her as the choice when he isn’t willing to get his life together either. But I’ll give his this — at least he recognizes that he is not a fit parent.

      • Applapoom says:

        I love Martin Sheen and this just baffles me as well.

      • KWM says:

        If you read Denise full letter she says that Martin has been really supportive and spending time with the children which Brooke blocked in the past.

        And Brookes mother is no prize, this is the same mother who after her daughter 20th stint in rehab had her come to a party they were throwing and be the guest bartender, the day she got out of rehab.

      • janie says:

        These boys are nothing but a means to an end to keep the money coming! This is so wrong on so many levels… I guess DCS won’t intervene until these boys are destroyed or physically hurt and land in the hospital or God forbid, the morgue. I’m really at a loss with the LA legal system? No one is ever held accountable for any actions ever? These little ones are at the mercy of 2 unfit parents & a system that doesn’t care.

      • Sabrine says:

        Sadly, Charlie doesn’t want custody. He will visit them but he doesn’t want them full-time in his home. They would cramp his party lifestyle. I understand the boys have been kicking and slapping Brooke too so it will be interesting to see how this all plays out. She’ll probably put up with a lot for that $55 K a month but she’s not going to get off scot free to enjoy her money. Those boys will get older and stronger and start getting into trouble at school and elsewhere. Their hitting and punching will probably escalate as well. Good luck with that, Brooke.

    • KC says:

      I agree. Charlie is a stupid selfish and abusive d*ck. He is a big part of why this is playing out in Brookes favor. The idiot couldnt keep his trap shut and let his expensive lawyers deal with this? Now the system is faced with a father who has publicly threatened his kids mum, who keeps tweeting and giving interviews about a situation affecting Minors and who we now all suspect to be either drugging or in the throes of a psyc episode. Add to that mix Denise, who may be a great carer but who the System knows to be allied to Charlie. So when she makes claims about the kids behavior, these are seen in light of Charlies conduct. And leaking that heartbreaking letter may win in the court of public opinion but in a court of law it raises questions over whether the Sheen camp really have the kids best interest at heart (side note: I saw comments on one site calling those babies budding serial killers)

      Now contrast that with Brooke, who on paper is peeing into a cup regularly and passing. Has kept her mouth shut about the drama against great provocation. Can credibly claim that Sheens camp is trying to elbow her out of the picture for good, including by handpicking a child psycologist to do the dirty work.

      My ideal situation is for Martin or Emilio to put on the Movie Star charm and visit Brooke with an offer of a larger monthly check if she leaver the pic. Charlie is too unstable to have a sensible sit down, I think. They then have to negotiate a similar deal with Charlie without the cash offer ofcourse. It wouldnt surprise me if the boys are learning the aggression from Charlie, imho. In any case his influence on them will get worse as they age. And that is as big a tragedy as Brooke being in their lives. They can then be adopted by Denise or some other party.

      • Kiddo says:

        Yes to everything you said. But that still leaves the kids without stability.

      • paranormalgirl says:

        To call them budding serial killers is a bit much, but they are developing and exhibiting socio/psychopathic tendencies. It’s all so very sad.

      • bluhare says:

        paranormalgirl, can this be treated?

      • gg says:

        I don’t think anybody needs to be giving Brooke money. She needs to GET A JOB and prove she is sober by being a functional adult.

        I am seriously pissed off at L.A. and its government.

      • K says:

        gg I don’t care if they give her the moon on a stick, as long as she’s persuaded to sign away her parental rights to Denise and have only a couple of hours of professionally (as in, a nanny or even better a psychiatric nurse) monitored contact with the boys a week. She’s so very clearly money motivated, and sure it will probably hurry her into a grave which is sad, but if it gives the boys a chance at a childhood worth the name, I think it would be the lesser evil.

        I completely agree with those saying Charlie is as bad. He’s a middle-aged, drug-addled Chris Brown as far as I can see, and what he’s done to all the women in his life is awful. But he has at least the sense to know he is not a fit parent either, requires monitoring to have visitation which he complies with, and isn’t fighting to have the kids for no reason other than money. He’s certainly no better than Brooke and very possibly worse, but he’s also infinitely less threat to the twins’ wellbeing, so I don’t really care in this area. If he committed himself to paying her double the child support every month, to be continued until the twins were 25, and threw in rental on a property until they were 30 – as long as she signed parental rights over in full to Denise – then I think she’d bite his arm off in her eagerness to sign the paperwork.

        If they go back to Brooke this is so obviously going to end with them separated and thrown into foster care when Brooke’s instability can’t be papered over any longer – and when, if Denise had been properly supported, she could have raised them in a home with their own siblings. It tells you everything you need to know that the state has removed children from Charlie and Brooke, while placing one for adoption and two for foster care with Denise – what more evidence is needed on which of the three should be accorded parental rights in the boys’ best interests? And this story just proves Denise was right when she said every time she’s raised her concerns they’ve been brushed off with “they just need to live with their mom again”. What the actual hell are they smoking at CPS/DCFS? Because I’m starting to think they must have the same supplier Brooke does. Their decision making doesn’t appear a whole heap better.

      • Hakura says:

        @K – Maybe she IS their dealer, so they don’t want to do anything to piss her off. It’s the only explanation I can think of, aside from their being a bunch of f!cking morons.

    • lucy2 says:

      I completely agree – if keeping them from Brooke is important to him, then he should step up! Clean up his life and be a father. It’s disgusting that he just waives it away as if he has no responsibility other than money. Those kids are in TROUBLE.

      • K says:

        I think he’s got very serious mental health problems by this point. They may have been drug-induced but I don’t think sobriety would be a magic wand anymore. I don’t think he could clean up to the point he’d be a fit residential parent for anyone. It blows my mind that people treated a man as a hero for using hookers and porn stars with young kids in the house, spoke smack about all his children’s mothers in the most disgusting way (still does, where Brooke is concerned), and all this when he has such a long history of woman-beating. I can’t stand Chris Brown either and I think they have much in common, but a white movie star has got quite a pass for even worse behaviour, that much is undeniable.

        I despise him. He’s a serially woman-beating, aggressive, child-neglecting POS. I actually have more time and sympathy for Brooke, who is ill and who he talks trash about when he’s just as bad, even in terms of the kids. As far as I know, she’s never serially beaten her exes, shot at them or ranted at length about how they deserve to die. But the fact is, she’s the immediate threat to their children’s well-being, not him. Neither is capable of cleaning up and neither is capable of parenting, and at least Sheen realises that Denise is the best option those kids have. Brooke’s just worried about her meal ticket. She can’t even imagine that Denise would remove her from the boys’ lives altogether – if ever a woman had grounds to want their children’s father gone, she has, but she’s been a bloody saint in putting her girls first and fostering and sustaining contact. It seems quite clear she’d do that for the boys with Brooke if under her roof and subject to her watchful eye – just as has been worked out with Charlie.

  4. Lindy79 says:

    WTF is going on in Child Services or whoever is looking after this case, is all I have to say?

    • LadySlippers says:


      That’s Child Protective Services for you. They strive to get the kids out of the system and back with the parents ASAP regardless of what’s best for the child(ren). Cuz you know, those 23 chromosomes mean everything to them. (FYI speaking from experience here)

      Both Charlie AND Brooke should have their parental rights terminated and those boys should stay permanently with Denise. They need love, security, and stability — none of which they’ll get with their biological parents.

      Sad situation but very common unfortunately. 🙁

      • Stef Leppard says:

        My SIL is terribly neglectful of her daughter, but the child still asks for her and used to cry for mommy when she woke in the night, even though it was always her dad who came for her. Children want their mothers. I think it’s wrong for CPS to force children into a bad situation solely so they can be with the biological parent, but I do think it is the ideal situation when appropriate and when the parent is making a real, genuine effort. In this case Brooke should really be sober and together for a full year (not including her stay in rehab) before non-overnight and supervised visitation is even considered.

        Also, can’t Charlie ask for custody and then hire a couple of really good nannies? That would be preferable to life with Brooke IMO.

      • Lotus says:

        Friends of mine are foster parents and dealing with this now. There’s a child in their care whose mother has had three other children taken away from her, been in rehab six times, and almost killed him because of his preexisting medical condition that comes from being the child of a drug addict, and CPS is probably about to give him back to her again. For the second time. After she’s almost killed him twice by not taking him to regular doctor appointments, and even though he suffers from PTSD, at 2 years old! The fault is as much our state’s lack of oversight of the various departments, as it is the fault of CPS in the county where this is happening. And if you, a foster parent, try to be an advocate for the child, CPS will punish you for it by taking the child away and not letting you foster again. It’s very messed up.

    • Meaghan says:

      Its typical, my best friend works for Child Services and its disgusting how many chances the drug addict parents get to their kids. Its because they believe the kids would be best with their natural parents, and my friend has had to hand kids over so many times to meth heads just when the kids start to settle down into their foster homes. The parents will stay clean for a little bit and then jump off the wagon time and time again. Its sad and disgusting but that is how the world is. And a lot of it has to do with the fact that there are more kids then foster homes, so it can be very difficult finding a proper placement for the children.

      And Charlie would never be allowed custody of the kids. No way no how. I actually have to give him some credit for not getting custody, at least he is aware that he would not be a good home for the kids because of his lifestyle. Too bad Brooke can’t do the same.

      • KC says:

        I agree with your comment but just want to add that Charlie not fighting for those boys isnt an act of selflessness much less self awareness. The jerk is just selfi, he likes to have his cake (offspring) and eat it too (nutty lifestyle). He has raised exactly zero of his kids, from the adult girl to the four year olds. He figures thats what mothers are for. Which is why he is so mad about Brooke. In his mind, her failures are forcing him to be more involved than he should have to be.

      • Ellen says:

        Yeah but if Charlie cared about his sons, and really wanted to save them from Brooke, he would STEP UP, right? What he’s saying with his actions is, “she sucks but I’m too selfish to save my boys.”

        CPS has a standard of trying to keep families together (for some fairly good reasons — it’s not as if the foster-care system has the capacity or the quality to take every child of drug-adddled parents) so it does make some sense to me that they’d try to reunite Brooke with her sons. I think Denise’s letter was actually part of a campaign to stop reunification from happening. But the other obvious route to keep the boys away would be for their father to go to Family Court and get the custody settlement from his divorce renegotiated. It’s a different standard there, when two parents have to argue where the kids should spend the majority of their time.

        Which brings us back to: If Charlie really gave a rat’s ass about his sons, he’d do the work to make himself a safe, healthy alternative to Brooke’s train wreck. He chooses not to do that work. He’s a total dirtbag of the highest order.

      • nicegirl says:

        This situation is a true picture of the events that take place in CA (and I can imagine other states as well) DAILY.

        At this point, I think all that can be done is that the folks who live in the County or City where the twins reside can CONTACT the LOCAL AUTHORITIES themselves to request a WELFARE check of the persons inside a particular residence. LIKE – If a neighbor or other caring citizen sees/hears/believes there to be abuse or neglect going on they can report that sh-t themselves. It sometimes takes people not at all involved with the parties in question to report “new” information.

        Anyhow, that is the way the situation I have been dealing with is playing out – we KNOW for a fact that a child in the state of CA is being abused, we have reported the abuse (to several authorities charged with public safety, including CPS, local PD, military office of special investigations, and more), “investigations” were “conducted” and the formal findings were “inconclusive.” I was told directly by California CPS that although they believe the allegations (due to lots of factors, including that past behavior is the #1 predictor of future behaviors), their investigation was inconclusive, but I am welcome to call them back to offer NEW information of abuse, etc., you know, whenever I get it . . . the sweet child I pray for is left in the clutches of very sick folks. Every single day. My newest hope and prayer is that someone ELSE actually cares for this darling child, that they SEE the signs and SOUNDS THE ALARM!!!. If a teacher, neighbor, bus driver, Dr., ANYONE not in the family, MAYBE she will have a chance. We all need to do this – IF YOU SEE SOMETHING< if you suspect something, dang it all, ask, call, look further!! please

    • Sloane Wyatt says:

      God/Universe help you, nicegirl, to get the child out of the hell that is his family! You might try going to other neighbors, teachers, ANYONE, who sees this child and bend their ear. Tell them what you’ve told us and urge them to report the “family” – I hate using that word for that pit of vipers who are hurting an innocent child. Then, give them a prepared list of the Authorities’ phone numbers to call and report those scum. Follow up with them every week until you succeed.

      (Maybe this horrific story will help others save innocents, and not just look the other way. I know a little something about this, and it makes all the difference in the world to a small helpless child when a stranger helps them in any way; both large and small efforts matter.)

      Good Luck and Godspeed!

  5. blue marie says:

    well, that sounds like a fabulous idea-she’s done such a bang up job so far..

  6. NeNe says:

    I should hope that no judge in his/her right mind would give this woman full custody of those kids. If they do, I feel just horrible for them.

    • brin says:

      This situation is insane, let’s hope the judge is rational and does the right thing for the boys.

    • Decloo says:

      The things is those boys need to be in full custody of SOMEBODY to establish a routine and give their lives some normalcy and stability. Charlie obviously cannot handle it and neither can Denise. Many of the disturbing things Denise mentioned could be attributed to the general instability of the arrangement (the going back and forth) and not just to Brooke as a mother. The state is taking some risks in giving Brooke full custody but they t don’t have a lot of options here. Maybe Brooke has been clean for awhile. They are probably making her take parenting classes. We don’t know everything that is in the file. Clearly the kids are better off in ONE place rather then shifting around. If Brooke does get full custody, there will be numerous requirements and checking up on her. I just don’t see what other option the state has.

  7. Moiselle says:

    Another website had more of the letter from Denise. She stated that she couldn’t care for the boys given that Brooke is blocking Denise’s attempts to get the boys treated. I came away from the letter thinking Denise COULD care for the boys if she was allowed to get them the treatment they needed.

    CPS (I live in CA) is insane. Remember that case in the ’80’s where a group of kids in one neighborhood were all taken from their parents bases on a few family photos of being nude in the tub? Few things have changed. If this happens, those boys will be either dead or majorly f’d up by the time they hit their tweens.

  8. Melissabee says:

    This is so sad. It seems pretty clear that the boys are acting out whenever they see their mother. I know that other people will say it better than I do, but for the love of glob! Wake up and smell the coffee, state of California! This woman cares NOTHING about these boys! This is just an attempt to get money, plain and simple. I guess that MAYBE she is trying for the sake of her boys, but my heart says no. I just pray that these little lost souls will be permanently placed in a home without their mother so that they can begin healing. So, so sad.

    • JenD says:

      Without Denise’s stability, those kids will probably spiral completely out of control. If they are acting this way with just visits to their mom, can you imagine how they’ll be when they’re with her full time?

  9. teatimescoming says:

    Those poor little boys. They’d be better off being raised by a pack of wolves.

    • Hakura says:

      @teatimescoming – At least a pack of wolves would have set boundaries, affection & family bonding, & strive to teach their offspring to take care of themselves in a dangerous world. Their main focus is survival & protecting their pups, not finding their next hit. You’re right; they’d be better off raised in the ‘wild’ than by Brooke.

  10. serena says:

    Dear god no, no and no! That can’t happen!
    “Mueller’s new commitment to her sobriety has impressed the Los Angeles County Department of Child and Family Services” WTF, Impressed???
    This is stupid, really, it’s obivious she doesn’t care for the boys (their mental state tells all) but just the money to drug herself again. Just WTF.

  11. Scarlet Vixen says:

    This just breaks my heart. Thank god I don’t live in CA anymore-CPS there is so ridiculous there! I have 3 little ones of my own, but i would take those boys myself if it meant keeping them away from that horrible excuse for a ‘mother.’

  12. bammer says:

    I’m flabbergasted by the idea that if you manage to put crack pipe down for a few weeks you are suddenly a great mother. Raising children is hard work regardless. Is spoiled, selfish, narcissistic, Brooke even if sober really a great choice? This is such a disgrace. Look at how Ryan O’Neals kids turned out.

  13. grabbyhands says:

    Unfortunately this is an all too common scenario-I can’t count how many times I’ve seen this same story play out on the news and it always ends in tragedy. Child Protective Services and agencies like it are a joke. Parents seems to be required to provide the very bare minimum in order to regain full custody of their children.

    If Brook hadn’t already tried to block her kids from getting any kind of serious help, which it is already painfully obvious they desperately need and that she is in no order to provide to them, then I might think she was just desperate to prove that she was better so she could have them back, but there are obviously other motives.

    But I still hold Charlie Sheen to blame as well. The limit of interest in these kids was foisting them off on his ex-wife. He has shown zero desire to curb his own selfish, childish, violent behavior, which is too bad because if he had just acted like a mature adult, maybe none of this would have gotten this far. So great-calling her a whore and telling her to eat a hand grenade has really helped the situation. I can’t believe people still like this douchebag.

    • LadySlippers says:

      Agreed GrabbyHands.

      And people, CPS is like this almost everywhere. It’s not just an issue in CA.

    • Len says:

      I don’t like Charlie but I don’t think he can do anything to become a fit parent & therefore I at least give him credit for recognizing that he’s a terrible awful shitty human being and kids shouldn’t be raised by him. It’s weird to praise someone for that but the alternative is putting children in harms way bc we expect him to meet some standards that he is actually incapable of meeting.

    • MrsBPitt says:

      Agree about CPS…however, I also blame the judges in these cases…after all, the judge has the final say in the matter…

  14. eliza says:

    DFS is useless.

    When Brooke is back on the crack/meth/booze, and one of those kids ends up in the hospital, will DFS be happy they reunited the boys with their wonderful momma?

    Brooke is counting down the minutes until that monthly $55k starts flowing back in.

    At least dirt bag Charlie knows he is unfit to raise these children.

    • Anne says:

      Just an FYI …

      -When Denise was granted guardianship she was offered an increase in child support to cover the boys and she refused.
      -When Brooke lost custody of the boys and was forced into rehab Charlie told the courts he would continue with her child support payment of $55,000 per month.

      As far as I know those provisions have never changed. Charlie is rolling in cash, I wish he would pay Brooke off completely, money well spent.

  15. Anne says:

    Devastating. This situation depresses the hell out of me. I’m worried about those boys.

  16. dahlianoir says:

    I live on a different continent and even I can see how unfit she is. Surely a JUDGE living nearby could see it ?

  17. Erm says:

    someone needs to slip brooke some awesome drugs/alcohol just before a tester arrives. Someone tell me that even if she gets full custody, at the first sign/evidence of a relapse, she will lose custody again, right? right?

    • Lem says:

      Right before court would be good

    • bluhare says:

      I’m not a fan of slipping a recovering addict anything, not even Brooke Mueller. However, I do think if she gets those boys back she’ll lose them again. If their behavior is as bad as Denise says, she’ll be stressed to the max (no pun intended) and will relapse. And Charlie should then quit enabling her and not pay her child support when she doesn’t have the children.

      • Lem says:

        not roofie- lie a hit on the back of the womans toilet. @21 rehab visits, she’ll sniff it out. Or she could pass.

        She had custody for 2 years yet she was never alone with her children, left them with Tiger Blood & the Goddesses (during that mess) before leaving them with DR voluntarily for the last year, before CPS stepped in.
        This is a woman who is blocking mental health help for 4 yr old babies just because she can. Her addled brain clearly does not have the boys interests in mind. In their entire little lives the only right thing she’s done is hand them to Denise. Which again, she did for years voluntarily so she could get high.

  18. Louisa says:

    Where are the boys now? Are they still with DR? Also, just curious if she can’t take care of them anymore, and BM does not (as she should not) get custody where would they go?

  19. Mon says:

    Makes you wonder how many cases like this happen each year… Are those people on crack too?! Tragedy.

  20. Christin says:

    This won’t happen, but I wish the court would order that all but a very small portion of the monthly child support be placed in a trust for the boys and she cannot touch it.

    In other words, tell her that she’d only get a fraction of that $55,000 (just enough for basic expenses). Then see if her level of interest changes.

    • Anne says:

      Sadly, as it is she really doesn’t have that many expenses. Charlie bought the house for her (paid in cash – free and clear).

      • KWM says:

        She is only getting 25,000 now, reports say she blew through all her money and her lawyers and rehab is eating up what she gets a month.

  21. lower-case deb says:

    i really want to be surprised, but then again this is the same state that has shown incomptence again and again with celebrity cases (see Exhibit Li Lo). sometimes i think that high profile celebrity cases can give bad precedence if handled incorrectly, it creates doubts on the system because it’s highly publicized, it overshadows and ultimately devalues those who are actually doing good deeds, and it makes people not take the law and Life seriously at the end.

    sad situation all around. poor children, i fear for the boys growing up without positive role models, but most of all i also fear for Denise’s daughters and the family dog. they’re the most innocent victims of all. 🙁

  22. Olivia says:

    I live in the UK and my impression of the California legal and welfare system is, that it is a joke. A farce. I am incredulous that no-one in authority seems to be putting the needs of the children first. These kids need help. They need a stable home environment and professional medical help to get through this nightmare.
    It appears to me that the state agencies that should be doing their jobs are more concerned about the possibility of lawsuits. Either that, or financial incentives are being provided to look the other way. I can’t see any other explanation and either way it is frightening. The citizens of California need to show their disgust with the lawmakers and politicians. Change will never happen if citizens allow this behaviour to continue.
    Team Max and Bob.

  23. Theresa says:

    Perhaps, just perhaps, with Charlie’s money, there is childcare help within the home that makes it possible for Mueller to have the children, but she is no way wholly responsible when they are with her. I couldn’t imagine who would work for her, as a nanny, but I do not see Brooke alone in the house with the boys, making them mac and cheese and giving them their baths. Not that this helps at all, but if I were some kind of narcissistic drug addict with money to spare, I would hire all the help I could get to take the kids off my plate so that I can have my friends over, or go out whenever I pleased. However, there is as much chance that the boys are suffering from neglect and abandonment issues coupled with any mental, biological or physiological problems and that is why they are acting out more since Brooke’s involvement has increased.

    Chances are that when she makes her appeal in court or to DCFS she demonstrates that she has help at home (nannies, staff) and therefore, they have no choice but to increase her involvement, there wouldn’t be any reason not to trust her with her kids. The missing element is that kids need more than someone there to keep them from burning down the house, they need to know they are loved, cared for by their parent(S) which I have no doubt Mueller is not capable of.

    The cycle here is bleak, no matter who is looking after them they will have to deal with those behavioural issues and anger. Nannies will come and go quickly if those boys don’t get help, and then the danger will be that Brooke and her family will be all that is left to care for them. And I do not doubt that the custody grab is about money. Maybe she likes her kids, I don’t think she’s a monster, but she’s under a crippling addiction, and the stress of those boys will drive her insane. Eventually there will be a serious crime committed, perhaps abuse, and then authorities will act, but it will be too late. These kids are slipping right through the cracks right in front of all our eyes. Incredibly sad.

    • Lady D says:

      She had 3 shifts of 2 nannies for those boys when she had them. She said herself that she has gone 4 days without seeing the twins, in their own home. She had all the help in the world for those boys.

  24. Kiddo says:

    Anyone know if a Guardian Ad Litem was assigned to the children in this case? If any case screamed out for it, it’s this one.

    • Shauna says:

      I can’t imagine there wasn’t. I hope they knock some sense into all these fools.

    • KWM says:

      Based on the full letter Denise sent, I don’t think so. Anything pertaining to the twins both Charlie and Brooke had to sign off on. It is a 2 yes deal, both have to agree of it cannot be done.

      The full letter is very interesting and heartbreaking. Anything beyond normal daily activities Denise has to get approval from Brooke and Charlie. Charlie is easy, Brooke’s seems to like to grant permission and then change her mind.

      1st she was behind the boys receiving treatment, but then said no, then said yes but with a doctor she chooses, it has been 2-3 months and they are still waiting for her to pick a doctor. Brooke also decided that she doesn’t want them going the the Pediatrician they normally seen and that she will pick a new one. Months and the boys still have no doctor, nor is Denise allowed to take them to the past Pediatrician if anything is wrong with them.

      Yet DCFS sees no problem with this….

      • Kiddo says:

        That makes no sense. The Guardian Ad Litem or judge should pick the docs or therapists, who have no bias toward either side.

    • nicegirl says:

      it makes no sense re: no Guardian Ad Litem. I have seen them appointed in WA State CPS child custody cases several times, but in all of my years as Legal Assistant in CA (about 7 – and this was almost 10 years ago, now), I never saw a Guardian Ad Litem appointed in MINOR CUSTODY cases (I worked mostly Nor Cal counties cases, for what it’s worth). They were appointed often in cases involving Elders, as I remember.

      SO STUPID, huh.

      I hate the “I am a drug addict, get out of jail free card” BS that has been happening for at least the last 15 years or so. If I ever get in trouble, I’m claiming DRUG ADDICTION from arrest. You get a do over.

  25. Kate says:

    I know this is wrong, but part of me hopes that Charlie Sheen leaves the country with his kids and gets them out of the clutches of their avaricious mother (and who doesn’t think this is about her getting her drug-addled hands on that huge child support check every month so that she can buy more drugs?) and moves his money into off-shore accounts. They’re both addicts, but when you’re choosing between the lesser of two evils, I would take the functioning addict who doesn’t harm his kids to the non-functioning addict who abuses them. Poor babies. They dont’ stand a chance, do they?

    • KC says:

      Both Denise and Brooke have stated that he physically abused them while pregnant. This is the guy who beat up a hooker for supposedly stealing a watch. The guy who left a loaded gun in his laundry basket. The guy who goes on drug binges regularly and doesnt believe in rehab. I dont believe for a minute that he is the better choice. I suspec that Brookes abuse manifests in neglect. And Charlies would be physical and psycological. Both are unacceptable but one has a higher shot of killing them. This is the saddest thing I have ever typed on a gossip site.

  26. Lem says:

    Those poor boys!

    Broke Mother will relapse

    octomom probably has room. CA seems to think she is an adequate mother

  27. Prettytarheelfan says:

    I have never cried over a celebrity situation until I read Denise’s letter. It grabbed my heart and squeezed. My son is not too much younger than those boys, and when I think about how much joy he experiences every day, it’s just devastating to know hose boys are stuck in that hellhole.
    Those boys had a chance. A damn good one, from what we hear. Sometimes reuniting the child with their abusive addict parent is NOT in his or her best interest.

    • Sloane Wyatt says:

      Crap, Prettytarheelfan, now I’m crying too. I can’t read anymore of this thread. Lord help those boys.

    • TQB says:

      That letter was truly heartbreaking.

      For a positive thought, though – that pic of Denise with the boys – has anyone ever looked more beautiful? She radiates so much love when she is around her children.

  28. Frida_K says:

    Charlie should offer her $110,000.00 per month (double her fees!) until the boys are eighteen if she will allow Denise to have full custody.

    Then Crystal Meth can be funded for what she really wants funding for, and meanwhile the poor little boys will get a sliver of a chance at a decent life.

    I’d now shouting “Winning!” but this is too sad for that kind of snark.

    • Anne says:

      The snark in me wants to add “Charlie should offer her $110,000.00 per month (double her fees!) until the boys are eighteen….OR UNTIL SHE ODs WHICHEVER COME FIRST….if she will allow Denise to have full custody.”
      No doubt, without having to worry about her pay check she will not have to slow down or clean up periodically.
      *Sorry if I offended anyone – I know it is not a humorous situation – at this point whatever it takes to save these 2 little boys lives.

      • emmie_a says:

        Anne: The snark in me totally agrees with you. Instead of waiting for her to relapse and lose custody of the boys again, Charlie should offer her the money in exchange for an alternate custody arrangement (supervised visits and no visits at her house). Someone did the math yesterday and the $55,000/mo until the boys are 18 was around $9 million. I’d think she’d be happy with that but if she wants more, give it to her — if only to ensure the mental and physical safety of the boys.

        I know addiction is a disease. I know it’s beyond hard to overcome. But people do it. Brooke has proven that she loves drugs more than her boys. She shouldn’t have the same rights as other parents because she is not a parent. She can’t perform the job.

  29. Marianne says:

    I know a lot of people are wondering why Martin Sheen won’t step up. The guy is in his 70s. Maybe he just isn’t fit enough to really keep up with 2 4year olds.

    I think the best situation would be if Brooke lost custody for good. And then if Denise was able to adopt the boys. Then she could legally get the boys whatever help they needed. She seems to really care for them. If Brooke truly got better, I’m sure Denise would allow her visitation on birthdays and other holidays.

    • MollyB says:

      I don’t think anyone is expecting Martin to be running around after them 24/7 himself but surely he can afford a proper home and nanny support. In any case, it’s probably a moot issue. Brooke’s parental rights have not been severed so whether or not the Sheens are willing to step up, they can’t just take the kids.

    • KWM says:

      In Denise’s letter she stats that the boys are enjoying having their paternal grandparents back in their life after their mother had prevented them from having a relationship with them.

    • Clever hand says:

      I am not one of those people who takes a blind item as 100% gospel but I saw one every that seemed to be about Charlie. It said that the reason his father doesn’t intervene is that he is deep in denial about how bad Charlie’s addiction is and still thinks that one day he will get clean and handle it himself.

    • MSMLNP says:

      I don’t understand this line of thinking “why doesn’t Martin step up?”

      Not that he has any blame in the actions of Charlie, and true that addiction can happen to ANY family….but what makes people think he is some stellar parent? the fact he is a likeable actor or celebrity? Addictions aside, Charlie is an asshole, and it could be argued that asshole kids come from asshole parents. Perhaps this isn’t true for the Martin/Charlie relationship, but just sayin’.

      Team Denise all the way. I really feel for these boys.

      • Kiddo says:

        I think Martin Sheen also had some addiction issues in his past. I remember watching some show, not too long ago, that said that he was totally f-ed up during the filming of Apocalypse Now. In fact, I think in one scene he is under the influence of something; alcohol or drugs, I forget which. I think he has since cleaned up his act, but I think his children were affected by who he was at that time.

      • GiGi says:

        Yes, Kiddo – you’re right. In fact, Martin Sheen now travels extensively giving talks to families of those struggling with addiction. He’s a huge benefactor for the recovery community.

    • H26 says:

      Also he and his wife raised Charlie’s daughter, who is in her twenties now i think….2 boys with the issues they have would be tough for his parents and they’ve already raised one of his kids. For some reason, I have the impression that Emilio has gone to tough love route with Charlie. His family has tried to help for years and it just seems to have fueled his sense of entitlement. It kills me that people basically pay him to be his douche self…. it’s not acting, Martin and Emilio are much more talented.

  30. eribra says:

    I live in Indiana- CPS is horrible here, a few years ago there was a newspaper article detailing something like 19 childrens deaths all of them having had CPS intervention and the primary failure being the goal of reuniting these children with biological parents. There are people who would love these children, who pray to have them, even the ones damaged by their parents and I believe Denise is that person. I hope like hell there is a Guardian ad litum (sp?) assigned. I agree that Charlie is a POS but he has money and that’s what it’s gonna take- just keep giving her the child support til she OD’s, it won’t take long. I really feel for these boys- I have a 4y/o little guy and I just can not imagine.

    • Kiddo says:

      That’s true, but the other side is that there are also many abusive foster care situations where people’s motives are also simply to collect checks, with no nurturing either. It’s an incredibly difficult job with a high rate of turn over and burn out. I don’t envy anyone who has to make these decisions.

    • Samtha says:

      Yes, re: Indiana. My cousin’s children have been abused for years. She is a psycho with Munchausen by proxy , and her husband is an abusive alcoholic. The kids have been taken out of their care and sent back, over and over. My husband and I tried to get custody, and their grandmother has tried to get custody, but the court keeps returning them.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        Don’t give up. Enlist others to report your cousin if they so much as sneeze. Give them a list of numbers to call. The more people from outside the family that formally reports your cousin, the better chance those children will have of getting out of their pit of despair.

        (Hell, write a fan letter to Eminem! His mother had Munchausen by proxy, so who knows? Good luck, and please keep trying to save your family’s children.)

      • Samtha says:

        We haven’t given up, but they have been reported so many times by teachers, doctors and nurses, and it doesn’t do any good. They’re removed for a month or so and put in family counseling. Then they’re sent right back. It’s really frustrating. The last time they were removed from the home, my cousin had purposefully given their two-year-old adult cold medicine and she had to go to the hospital. The ER doctor called the police.

        Now my cousin takes them to various urgent care facilities all round the tri-state (Indy/KY/OH) area with problems and injuries that we know she’s inflicted (like purposefully getting medicine the older boys are allergic to, or rubbing poison ivy all over them). It’s harder to prove when they’re seeing different doctors rather than a single pediatrician.

        They have court-ordered family counseling, but the kids are too afraid to tell the therapist anything. One told me he’s “not allowed to talk about daddy.” It’s a mess.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        I’m so sorry; you must feel so helpless. By this time in your situation, Samtha, I don’t know what I’d be capable of. Hidden motion activated cameras and brake wires come to mind.

        Thank you for fighting for them.

      • nicegirl says:

        Sloane Wyatt, thank you for your words of support and rallying the cry to all of us fighting for children to NOT GIVE UP. F-ck it is hard though, especially when the perpetrators retaliate against you, and it becomes dangerous. So regarding the brake wires, YOU HAVE NO IDEA.

        SAMANTHA, girl, I UNDERf-ckinSTAND. Prayers going out to you and yours.

  31. Ok says:

    I was watching the entertainment news last evening and this was one of the main stories.

    As I was watching I was struck by how physically absolutely beautiful Brooke looks. She is one of the prettiest women I have seen.

    Which is amazing as to how you can be such a bad addict and put your body through so much abuse, but yet outwardly you are stunning and vibrant. Just so ironic.

    That being said, I guess it comes down to parents ultimately being responsible for their own children. It is not up to you, me, Denise or the State.

    But it is hard to stand by and watch someone so pathologically irresponsible be the primary caregiver of babies.

    We can hope for one of two things: maybe Brooke will hire the same nanny that Courtney Love hired to raise Francis Bean Cobain. Or maybe Brooke will just pass away from an overdose or heart attack.

    But I don’t think that Brooke stepping up and being a responsible parent is in the cards.

  32. Thiajoka says:

    Okay, probably going to ripped over this, and I’m not in California, but I do know social workers and have a family member who has worked in CPS before, so I’m about to defend social workers in general.

    First of all, there is this fact, that there aren’t enough foster families available for all of the abused and neglected kids who really should be placed outside their homes. The solution is overcrowding a foster home and risking overloading a foster-giver who already has too many problematic kids to deal with. Then there is the ugly side of foster care which is that many givers are in it for the money, not for the love of abused, damaged children. I was asked a few times to be a foster-care home and I’m just not emotionally or physically able to deal with children in general and abused kids in particular. So, sometimes there is simply nowhere safe to place the child.

    Then there are the parental rights–a child can be removed from a damaged home but the parent(s) can usually get the child(ren) back if, as in Brooke’s case, they show intent to change. Again, this goes to the fact that the court considers it best that the child(ren) stay with the birth parents or someone who is blood-related to them, but also there is simply the law in general which does come down on the side of the parents. A hard fact to swallow, but it’s the truth and has to be considered.

    Then there is the fact that the social workers of the children are regularly threatened, physically, or with legal action. My relative began keeping a gun in her vehicle after a while because some of the parents, who were abusive, drunk, drugged or all of the above, threatened her. She eventually left CPS for another job in social services that deals with disabled adults. So please don’t blame the social workers–they are overworked, have too many caseloads, and it’s not their fault–it’s the system. It’s the job–there isn’t a calling for that many people to go into that field because it’s a shitstorm.

    Having said that, I do hope those kids end up with someone who will help them.

    • Samtha says:

      No argument here. It’s not the social workers’ fault; in 90% of the cases their hands are tied. The laws themselves are problematic, and the system is overloaded.

    • Kiddo says:

      I agree, I said something similar above. Although the system may need serious change and more hands on deck, people who can not care for children should decide not to have them in the first place. Sheen already had kids he wasn’t taking care of directly. If he wanted to stick it everywhere, and with everyone, and maintain the same hedonistic drug-fueled lifestyle, he should have had a vasectomy. I think child protective services is getting TOO much blame and not enough is going at Charlie. He’s not a hero and they are not the villains. He made an environment which necessitated their stepping in in the first place.

      • Thiajoka says:

        Amen! If you can’t care for them, don’t have them! It’s irresponsible to have kids and just hope that somehow life turns out okay without adequate planning on your part. Of course, so many adults tend to see children as mere accessories to their social standing, in my opinion.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        Amen, Thiajoka!

        Now, how can anyone argue against handing out condoms in school? No one is going to stop having sex, and Brooke & Charlie are a case in point for the horrors of unfit people having children.

  33. Samtha says:

    Charlie, now is the time to break out your checkbook and write Brooke a big fat check in exchange for her parental rights being terminated.

    • dorothy says:

      Agree. I believe that the main reason Brooke want’s the boys is the child support. Sad. Write her a check and be rid of her.

  34. the original bellaluna says:

    When has she NOT been relapsed? Those poor boys deserve better. I hope Denise ends up with them permanently. Who knows what Brooke does to/gives them when has them?

    • Lady D says:

      Hey, hey Original B. I was actually thinking about you yesterday. Are things well for you?

      • the original bellaluna says:

        Hey Lady D! I’ve been doing okay. Things in my life have drastically changed, but I’m hanging in there and doing my best. How are things with you?

  35. Tig says:

    Please don’t judge folks too harshly for not offering to take these boys in- look what happened to Denise when she did. Both parents are bat s$&t crazy, and clearly are determined to undermine any attempt to help these boys. Sadly, involuntarily terminating parental rights is a tough legal process. Given Brook’s cash flow, even if such a case was initiated, she could tie it up for years with motions, discovery, etc. This is one of those situations where you hope the expression “God looks after fools and small children” is true.

  36. Sunny says:

    don´t know … we know only what Charlie tells (i don´t trust him) or what “sources” tell us.
    Should it be true that Brooke has been sober for several months and that she has done everything that has been asked of her by DCFS… then she should get a chance (the last one) to finally be and act as a real mother to her sons. Addicts are different people when they are finally sober. Seems she wants to change for her sons. I hope it. This will be her last chance.

    • Kiddo says:

      Yeah, agreed, he is certainly driving the press bus.

    • emmie_a says:

      Well I think we have proof from Denise and I believe what she says over what Brooke says. And Brooke has been sober for several months before. Then she relapses and the whole cycle starts again. Why wasn’t the last time this happened her last chance? What’s different now? I don’t think the court ever says, ok – we’re giving you custody again but this is your last chance (but correct me if they do), which is why something has to be done now, before the cycle repeats.
      I have never lived with a crack addict but thank God nothing horrible has happened to the boys. Well, I take that back because I was thinking of their physical safety but as Denise outlined in her letter, something horrible has already happened to the boys. So why is it ok to put them back in that situation?

    • Samtha says:

      She hasn’t had enough time to “prove” her sobriety. Your first few months sober (and no, I don’t count her time in rehab) are a really fragile and volatile time, emotionally. Having the kids back probably isn’t good for her continued sobriety, let alone the kids’ welfare.

    • Lady D says:

      If she has been sober for months, what is causing the twins night terrors after each visit? Why do they go back to Denise’s exhibiting worsening violent and destructive behaviour? My heart breaks for those boys. I know what it is like to grow up without parents that at best don’t care, (dad) at worst are horrifically violent (mom). Someone needs to save those boys from the hellhole their life is in. Great, now I’m crying too.

      • Lady D says:

        *with* parents that…

      • emmie_a says:

        Lady D: It’s hell growing up in that type of environment – and it’s hell trying to recover from it once you’re old enough to deal with and understand all the damage. *Hugs* & blessings to you – I hope you are healing.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        God, I’m so sorry, Lady D. Me too. I’m very grateful you made it.

      • Kiddo says:

        Sorry about your experiences.

        If everything Denise wrote is accurate, which is not evident to me (she seems genuine, but also closely aligned with Charlie), I would imagine, as emmie said, that this is a cumulative effect of their past and not necessarily specifically indicative of current day atrocity. They are at the point when they can act out with greater consequence for those around them.

        They may have very bad memories of the last round with Mommy, bad things could be happening again, we don’t know, but now they are at the age where their dysfunction can clearly be expressed.

      • Lady D says:

        Thank you all. My personal mantra for years has been, young and tough. So far, it’s still working.
        I had a thought about Brooke. Charlie went on a rage slamming Denise everywhere, to everyone, saying the worst things about her. Turns out Denise is the hero in this situation. What if Charlie is doing the same thing to Brooke? Five years from now we could be saying the same thing about Brooke that we are about Denise. Assuming Brooke stays clean.

      • Alexis says:

        Thanks for sharing your story LadyD. I’m so sorry you had to go through so much growing up. It hurts my heart that these horrific family stories of violent abuse of innocent kids play out again and again, with the help of the state. Why do so many children have to suffer? It’s too horrible. But anyway, I agree with your latest observation. Sitting here, I have no way of knowing what situation would be best for the boys. I can only hope they find their way there. It seems that no small part of their young lives has been filled with horrors I can’t even imagine…

      • nicegirl says:

        Love and strength to you, Lady D. KEEP YOUR HEAD UP! thank you for sharing part of your experiences

  37. mimi says:

    This situation keeps getting worse by the minute and it’s those poor little boys who will suffer greatly if either of the biological parents gets full custody of them. Too bad it didn’t work out for them in Denise’s care. She seemed to be providing the best environment for them to grow up in. But she is wise to put her own children’s and also the family pet’s safety into consideration. Hopefully some loving relative without schemes or intentions of doing it for the $55,000 monthly support money will step up and provide a loving and nurturing home for the boys.

  38. moon says:

    How is it a government agency can let this happen?? Seriously? Also am I the only person worried about these boys being sexually abused? The fact that they’re acting out, having nightmares, and that Brooke has weirdos hanging around her house all the time….

  39. NorthernGirl_20 says:

    This is such a tragic story. Those poor children, having an extremely rich and famous parent should mean that they live a life of luxury – not the life they have been living. I fear that this is going to have a very sad ending if Brooke gets custody of the boys.

  40. twoblues says:

    As the mother of autistic twin boys, I find this whole mess heart breaking. Those little guys desperately need a stable, safe and loving environment to grow up in. Brooke simply can’t provide that. At least Denise tried. I need to stay far away from this story from now on.

    • Sloane Wyatt says:

      I keep coming back every few hours, and it’s like obsessively picking at a wound. Man, how much worse must it be for those little boys to be living this nightmare.

  41. Samtha says:

    I hope this is just a BS story put out by Brooke to save face.

  42. Denise says:

    Well, I owe Denise Richards an apology. The other day I commented on a post saying I still wasn’t completely convinced she was caring for the boys altruistically though I hoped she was. Just the fact that she has a sketchy past, photos of her doing coke on the beach with Richie Sambora, marrying a guy like Charlie Sheen in the first place, her not looking healthy right now were all in the back of my mind. First, I’d forgotten she declined payments for taking care of the boys. Second, I just read her letter. There’s now no doubt she’s a good person, she’s been through hell for these kids.

    • Kiddo says:

      Well, if you are a cynic like me, you have to wonder if she may have been receiving something under the table, if she has fears of Charlie, whether it be physical danger, or reputation damage, (as he’s doing now with Brooke), or some other motivator aside from the maternalistic aspect. It’s quite possible that it is ALL of those things, at play, at once.

    • xxx says:

      I wonder if DR does a lot of coke presently simply because of her history, it’s like people forgot about how she basically had an affair with her best friend’s husband and then the infamous coke pics, Charlie the junkie, there is a pattern…. is there anyone around Charlie Sheen that’s not into heavy drugs? I hope I am completely off and that her rapid weight loss is due to stress but to me it’s sketchy but at least this woman still has a heart, more so than the biological mother.

      • Kiddo says:

        I’m no fan or advocate of Brooke. I’m playing devil’s advocate. But based on what essentially boils down to written testimony (from a person aligned with one side, if you will) everyone has already convicted her. This has been a very concerted campaign of character assassination. I do think there is merit based on past history. At the same time, that letter from Denise is not direct evidence of any concrete incidences, cause and effect, and no one knows whether the children’s behavior, if it is indeed that bad, can be attributed to only one parent.

  43. Leslie says:

    How can the state or CPS (or whoever makes the decision) allow her to have any kind of custody? She’s been in rehab at least 20 times, and she’s still a messed up addict. Woman shouldn’t even have visitation rights. Why can’t Charlie’s father Martin Sheen step in and do something? Maybe he already has, I don’t know.

  44. Fan says:

    Why or why?

  45. Megan says:

    Oh lord those kids have no hope. Seriously there isn’t anyone better then their parents? I mean what is wrong with DCFS?

    I want the judge to tell Charlie and Brooke that from now on Charlie’s child support- which stays the same- goes into a trust for those boys that they will have access to at 25. Brooke will never be allowed to touch it. Lets see if she still wants those kids then. I think she needs to be tested on that. She should have to get a job and support those kids and have zero access to that money. A court appointed trustee can pull from it for school and clothes but Brooke should never be allowed to see or touch that money and since she can’t be trusted the basics should be covered by her. Sorry but since I don’t think that money goes to the boys but for meth, I just feel this is the best for those kids.

  46. Mary says:

    LOOOOL did anyone else notice her striking resemblance to Charlie in the first photo? Brooke isn’t a pretty woman by any measure, but GAWD, that’s a terrible photo.

  47. Dommy Dearest says:

    They might be giving this woman her children back but take children out of homes due to spankings. So I guess that means we can all be addicts and have our children but certainly not discipline them.


    Ladies and gents, once again how our system is screwed from the inside out.

  48. Jessiebes says:

    These poor boys. What a sad sad situation. All of the money or fame, in the world will not help. These boys need a hero and it’s not going to be Brooke or Charlie and sadly not Denise either.

    Yep going to pray.

  49. Jag says:

    Why would DCFS not require a few years’ worth of clean tests before giving them back to that disgusting human being? Meth is horrible, and she has been in rehab 21 times!!!! She has proven that she can’t stay clean, and she is a danger to those boys!

    Why is DCFS not saying anything about the fact that the evil woman has been blocking Denise’s attempts to get the boys care? If she won’t let Denise get them care, then why hasn’t SHE gotten them proper care? How can they overlook her neglect of them?

    If anything happens to those boys, every single judge and social worker who gave them back to her should lose their jobs and never be able to work with children again. This story is upsetting to me. Those poor boys!

  50. xxx says:

    She won’t make it through the holidays clean, no way.

  51. Lem says:

    I think this is an attempt by Denise to force the hands that are preventing her from getting the boys help.
    That is how I read it. She has had those boys on/off since birth. I have faith she is not giving up, she is making a stand for the boys.
    Denise clearly lives to rescue and loves a challenge (dogs, pigs, Charlie)
    I believe she loves those boys and considers them family.
    She has shown her tenacity proctecting the girls; forcing Charlie to comply and mostly behave in the presence of his daughters. She has to work for that, even when he is trying to kill hookers in the next room. She somehow reigns in his crazy long enough for her daughters to have a coherent father figure.

    She needs her girls to be safe and she needs the boys to have emergency mental health help. How does she do this with her hands tied by Brooke? I think this is a stand. I don’t think she is giving up on the boys. I think she’s preparing for battle.
    Hopefully she is just finding the will and the way to fight a twobit junkie for the lives of twin boys that she clearly loves as her own. (after battling the warlock, this should be easy)
    gossip says 3 weeks until Brooke regains full custody. That would be tragic but I don’t believe even then Denise would abandon them. It might however soothe Brooke enough to let Denise get them into therapy. Let B win battle so D can win the war, type thing. If/when Brooke regains custody she is never actually interested in the boys, just the check. Brooke leaves the boys with Denise anyway.
    I’m choosing to believe with a little bit of this & a little bit of that Denise is figuring out how to best help Max & Bob

  52. brooklyn says:

    People need to wake up and step outside the bubble world they are living in. There is a whole segment of the population that pays their taxes and believes there is a program for everything and everyone and that said programs take care of all of society’s ills. I was raised in a typical middle class family and believed that in cases such as these there would be no need to worry as of course there is family court to step in and make the decision that is in the best interest of the children. That common sense would prevail and the children would not be sent to live with either of their sad excuse for a parent.Unfortunately first hand experience as taught me this is not so. My family had money so we could afford to hire a private lawyer so we were able to protect my niece. Unfortunately her half brother was not so lucky. He was removed from the mother’s home at age three and placed with his newly paroled father. From age four until thirteen he was removed from his father’s home seven times. Do the math. His father would either be sent to jail and or rehab. Upon being released the boy would be returned to his father who would be given an apartment, rent money, food stamps etc. The final time he was sent back the judge said the boy was safe as long as he didn’t sleep in the home so he had to sleep at a friends house every night. Also his father was in rehab, so the counselors were watching him, he was on probation so he saw an officer each week, and CPS was watching the boy. The father overdosed and was also attacked by some angry drug dealers, in the home mind you while the boy hid in his room. I could go on and on and tell you a million other incidents that went on while the boy lived with his father over this nine year period.We learned that many, many children are in this position. We learned that when we called the abuse hotline they told us since we didn’t actually see the drug activity they could do nothing. We learned that when we went to the police because the boy left a message on our answering machine asking for help that it was not any of our business if the boy was in school because we were not related. We learned that since he and his father were being monitored by all these agencies what more did we want done. We learned that no one cares.Fortunately the father is disabled now do to the overdose and the attack by angry dealers he is no disabled and lives in a nursing home where we the taxpayers will pay for his care for the rest of his life. He is now only forty so it will be a long life. The boy now lives with the maternal grandmother. So if anyone thinks that these boys stand a chance in hell please step out of the bubble world into the real world and know that they are in danger and no one can help them until it is too late and then maybe not even then. I live in NY state. We were told that abuse of one child does not mean the other children are being abused or neglected. That is why we had to fight tooth and nail to keep my niece from having to visit with him in his home. Just because the boy was in danger and couldn’t sleep there did not mean his younger half sister could not sleep over there. WAKE UP . The system is not geared to act in the best interest of the children

    • nicegirl says:

      Totally awesome that you are caring for and helping your niece. It gives me hope.

    • Kiddo says:

      I feel very sad for the little boy and I’m glad the girl is doing better. The system fails many, but does rescue some. I don’t know what the answer is. To disassemble it entirely is to have nothing, and no survivors. It would be good to have an overhaul, but the public isn’t always happy to pay more for expansion of social services and the government is slow to make change.

    • Dommy Dearest says:

      Wow, that’s a horrible sad story 🙁

      But I can’t say I’m surprised by the actions of the court. They’re lying when they say they want the child’s best interest. Our country is ran by clowns, liars, and hypocrites. What I don’t understand is why they’ll quickly remove a child from parents that smoke marijuana but won’t if the parent is doing harder drugs. How they’ll take a child away from a spank but leave children with actual abusers that have broken their bones etc.

  53. CeltLady says:

    Sadly, abused kids are far too often put back in the hands of their abusers, if they ever actually are even removed in the first place. Child “Protective” Services here in Ohio would rather leave kids with a bipolar/schizophrenic/alcoholic mother than ever remove the kids. I speak from experience, having been one of very few people to try to advocate on behalf of these precious kids. A baby with broken bones, another always bruised and unkempt, a 3rd with fetal alcohol syndrome. Instead of saving these children, CPS told them that I reported the abuse, leaving me to be harassed by the perp. CPS explained away the broken bones as an accident, the bruises were clumsiness, the FAS was autism, none of which was true. I am horrified that so few people care enough to get involved and report abuse, and also that CPS here often drops the ball and kids die. There is a case here in Cleveland being tried right now where a mother murdered a 3 year old baby and threw him in a dumpster. What in the HELL is wrong with people? Please, people, if you event remotely suspect abuse, step up and do the right thing. Precious little lives depend on it.

    • May says:

      It’s the same here in PA… the charges of child abuse against my father may never have been expunged, but that didn’t stop them from ordering me to have visitation with him again, even when my mental health took a turn for the worse immediately afterwards. I don’t have much faith in the system anymore, I’m sorry to say.

  54. Jennifer12 says:

    She doesn’t want to be a mother, she wants control. People took away what she thinks of as her possessions and she wants them back because she “owns” them, not out of love or a desire to raise them. These poor kids don’t stand a chance.

  55. Sol says:

    This is what happens when DCFS fails to protect children, hope Max and Bob get a happy ending.

  56. NovemberScorpio says:

    I would imagine one trip to rehab is expensive. So who had been footing the bill for the other 20 times? I truly believe this woman is a lost cause. She’s an addict with no job, nothing to do all day, out of control addiction issues, and a shit ton of child support coming in every month. Of course she’s going to use again! Her kids are better off with Denise. And that’s exactly where they will go when she doesn’t survive her next OD.