Kelly Rutherford on her kids: ‘We’re just really bonding, which is nice’

STYLISH_B772_322243_0450
Kelly Rutherford’s international custody battle was a case study in what not to do. It all started in 2012 when she worked to have her ex, German national Daniel Giersch’s, visa revoked. He moved to Monaco and a judge ruled that their two children, Helena, then 2, and Hermes, then 5, would go to live with him overseas. Kelly fought him in court and in the press and even kept the children with her in violation of a court order. In 2015 she lost custody to Daniel although she retained visitation rights. From most accounts Daniel tried to help her keep in contact with them. Now that her children are 9 and 12, Kelly says she’s maintaining contact with them. She gave People Magazine some bland quotes at a charity event. Here’s more:

Kelly Rutherford says she’s doing “great” these days despite her bitter divorce from German businessman Daniel Giersch and the six-year custody battle that followed.

At Thursday’s Smile Train 20th Anniversary Gala, the Gossip Girl actress, 50, told PEOPLE that she sees her children often and that both are “wonderful.”

“They’re just growing so fast,” Rutherford, who currently stars on Freeform’s series The Perfectionists, told PEOPLE. “They’re just becoming their own people like, you know, all of us. It’s beautiful to see, and I love that they share it with me. They’re really open with me. We’re just really bonding, which is nice.”

As PEOPLE previously reported, Rutherford’s children Helena and Hermes live in Monaco with Giersch, who was awarded full custody in 2015. Rutherford confirmed to PEOPLE last night that both children still live overseas with their father, but says she has a close relationship with them nevertheless.

[From People]

Seeing Kelly’s narcissistic win-at-any cost behavior during her custody battle confirmed to me that these children were better off with their father. Both the judges who ruled in this case, in California and Monaco, saw that too. She wasn’t cooperative with her ex. Also you can tell by the way she phrased these quotes about her children, “I love that they share it with me,” and “we’re just really bonding,” that she’s not close with them. In trying to cut their father out of their lives, she just ended up cutting herself out.

STYLISH_B772_322243_0453

View this post on Instagram

@samanthayanks ♥️

A post shared by Kelly Rutherford (@kellyrutherford) on

Related stories

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

17 Responses to “Kelly Rutherford on her kids: ‘We’re just really bonding, which is nice’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. anniefannie says:

    The dead give away that she’s full of it is using the word “ bonding “.
    At 9 and 12?!? If she’s still in that phase her ship as a mother has probably sailed…

    • HelloSunshine says:

      Exactly what I was thinking! What a strange word to use. Shes known them their whole lives, the fact the she needs to bond with them tells me they know she’s not a good person and don’t like her all that much,

      And I don’t blame them. I followed her court cases and stuff and she was AWFUL. Thought she should get custody just because she’s the mom when the kids have a stable father in their lives who was trying to keep their relation with their mom positive.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      Yeah, I think those kids have probably clued onto the fact that their mother is crazy and selfish. Given that the ex ‘encourages’ her contact with them also tells me that she has lost interest in them now that she can’t use them for attention and that the children’s father likely has to bribe her to spend time with them, like pay for her to come visit etc..

      Plus she’s getting the face she deserves.

    • lucy2 says:

      Yeah the “bonding” comment stuck out to me too.
      I feel very badly for those kids, she used them as pawns to get back at her ex, and they had to deal with so much craziness at that time.
      I hope they have a happy and stable life with their dad.

  2. Immy says:

    I remember a few years back when all of this was happening there were some court documents online and was shocked by what she had done, I’ve never looked at her the same since. Her behavior when it came to this case and what she was doing even emotionally to her children was terrible.

  3. Sparkly says:

    Serves her right. I hope her kids are flourishing.

  4. Marlene says:

    I believe Giersch lived in the US when his visa was revoked. He was thrown out of the country. He then chose to return to Monaco, where he lived prior to moving to the US.

  5. LT says:

    I share custody 50/50 with my ex. I cannot imagine a situation like this, where I either barely saw my children OR I tried to make it so they barely saw their father. It would be unbearable to me to go weeks/months without seeing my kids. I know it happens, but I cannot imagine.

    • Cee says:

      She caused this situation. She forgot her children were German citizens, too. She accused her husband of various crimes to ensure his visa was revoked. It was later proven to be fraud however he was barred from entry to the US where his children resided, and as they were German citizens as well, custody judges determined that the children would reside abroad with their father as the mother was free to travel back and forth from the US. It basically backfired on her.

  6. Monicack says:

    Is she wearing white?

  7. Jen says:

    I assume she can’t afford a stylist due to still paying off legal bills? If she has one, they should be fired immediately. That dress is all kinds of horrid.

  8. geekychick says:

    Her custody battle was a lesson in “ignorant american privilege”. The way she talked about their dad and tried to make them living in Europe seem like a crime against humanity…my god, it was a mess!

  9. jwoolman says:

    She can talk to them all the time on video calls, wherever she happens to be. Her ex is a computer whiz. That’s a real game-changer for non-custodial parents, if they choose to use it.

    Her problem was always that she thought she could push their father away when she no longer wanted him in her own life. So the problem of parental alienation is real when she is unsupervised. She repeatedly ignored the conditions laid down by the judge to protect the kids, while her ex seemed to be following them to the letter.

    Her shenanigans trying to refuse to give back the kids after a visit was a turning point for the court, I think. She probably has never been entirely trusted since then. Her behavior was so bizarre. She apparently was planning to go on the run with them, which is every divorced patient’s nightmare. They’re older now, so that will be harder to do successfully. I imagine their dad has thoroughly instructed them on various ways to contact him…. .

    • theplott says:

      Kelly did go on the run with the kids, on the day she was to transfer them back to Daniel’s mother in NYC for a flight back to Monaco. She was papped packing a car that morning and taking off with the kids and her then BF. The rumor was that her lawyer called, while they were heading out to Long Island (or somewhere else), and stressed upon the BF he could be charged with kidnapping. That’s when one could hear a screeching U-turn and the lot came back to NYC.

      Kelly’s biggest mistake was not filing any transfer of custody to NY State and assuming that she could fake her way into still being a resident of California. Daniel filed the custody arrangement in Monaco exactly as ordered. California ruled that Kelly was no longer a resident (with an address at her mother’s motel) and since there was no NY State custody filing, Monaco had jurisdiction. She couldn’t keep the children on any grounds without a valid custody order in NY State. It was so incredibly stupid that it almost looked like Kelly wanted the kids in Monaco.

  10. Bunny says:

    Kelly Rutherford was and is a lesson in what not to ever do. She did all she could alienate her children’s father, and it backfired in the worst way. I feel terribly sorry for her children, and not at all bad for her.

    This case destroyed my view of Vanity Fair, too. Their horribly biased, pro-Kelly story was so over-the-top, and full of non-trutgs and half truths. I cancelled my subscription and never looked back.

  11. booney says:

    He’s hardly innocent. He runs a bunch of scam companies and he never bothered to renew his US visa which would have allowed both parents equal access. I agree that what she did was wrong, but the kids were US citizens, born and raised here. It’s shocking that a judge could do this.