Lawyer says Debbie Rowe is undecided about seeking custody of Jackson children

An attorney for Debbie Rowe, the mother of Michael Jackson’s two elder children, said today that she has not made a final decision to seek custody, despite telling a television reporter that was her intention.

Eric George, Rowe’s lawyer, did not dispute that Rowe told an NBC-TV Channel 4 reporter by telephone that she wanted custody of Prince Michael Jr., 12, and Paris Michael Katherine, 11, the children she bore when married to Jackson.

The youngest, Prince Michael II, 7, was borne by an unidentified surrogate mother. During the interview, Rowe said she would take a DNA test to prove she is her children's biological mother.

“I want my children,” Rowe said.

But her lawyer said it would be a “distortion of the truth” to interpret Rowe’s comments to the television reporter as her final decision in the custody case.

“I am representing to you unequivocally that Debbie has not reached a final decision” on custody, George said.

He described the custody proceedings as “the most private and the most sensitive of matters as they impact the lives and fates of young children.”

As the biological parent, Rowe, 50, would be in line to obtain the children unless a judge determined that would not be in their best interest. Rowe appears to have had little contact with the children over the years, though she does have visitation rights.

Katherine Jackson, the pop icon’s mother, has temporary custody of the children. Jackson said in a 2002 will that if his mother could not care for his children, guardianship should go to soul singer Diana Ross, 65, a close friend who was a strong artistic influence.

A custody hearing scheduled for Monday has been postponed until July 13 at the request of attorneys for Katherine Jackson and Rowe.

—Maura Dolan in San Francisco

Comments

[Xbox]

Yeah, Eric George, it is a "distortion of the truth" to interpret someone saying "I want my children" as meaning that she wants her kids.

[Grammy of Igo]

She was paid off twice, is she back for more? Wonder how much to make her give them up this time?

[a reel mom]

What kind of mother is this woman that would SEPARATE the children from their younger brother... If she was wise and had any kind of sense she would keep her BIG MOUTH SHUT and wait. She is very cruel to think of taking her kids. Does she not realize that they will be worrying about their brother. She needs to go to the bible and read about wisdom. She may be some type of mother but definitely NOT A MOM...

[Phyllis LaJune]

Michael Jackson's kids should not be with Debbie Rowe. They will soon know, if they don't already, that she was willing to take money to relinguish her parental rights. Now, as if they are pieces of property with significant value, she is contemplating a custody battle. By the way, doesn't her attorney also stand to gain in terms of fees paid now and in the future for services pertaining to this battle?

Debbie's actions exacerbate an already horrible psychological fact that would anger any reasonably intelligent child. Other children who are aware of this wouldn't make it easy for them. It is horrible to know that Debbie cared more for money than them. That's just as abusive if not more than what Michael experienced.

Debbie, allow this family to go forward. Show your love for these children by being an active part of their lives as they are raised by their grandmother, Mrs. Jackson, and Michael's brothers and sisters.

Your actions now appear to be aligned more with access to money than for the love of the children. It is now too late to say you want to be their mother and to be willing to fight Michael's mother. You should have made your presence known more with the family and with the children while Michael was alive. You had choices. You could have built those relationships and you can still do it if you choose to in the right way or if you could have fought harder and more openly to see them if you were being held back by Michael or anyone else in his camp. That would have looked like what you are now contemplating and threatening to do now that Michael is dead.

Further, you are raising a stink about this before Michael is laid to rest. His death is already terrible hard for millions of people around the world. Your timing with this confusion makes it even worse.

Let Michael rest in peace by honoring his wishes as set forth in his will. That means all of his wishes. Don't be named among the leeches who are lining up to get a piece of him even in death! Your children will honor you later if you show appropriately your love for them now. You can still make a positive choice. It begins with you being willing to make the change and take a higher road than you are targeting.

[Gayle]

Janet should have those children because she seemed like she was motherly toward them, especially Paris.