Michael Jackson Children’s Custody Battle

The custody battle, over the two oldest Jackson’s children, is just one of the many phases of the late Michael Jackson’s saga. The parties to the dispute are, Katherine Jackson, (named by Michael, as caretaker of the children in his Will) and Debbie Rowe, the surrogate mother, and ex-wife.

The case is reported to commence on Monday. This comes after a previous delay ordered by the court, allowing the parties to work on an “out of court settlement”. It is not known if any agreement was reached between the parties, but this may be known in less than twenty four hours.

Given the circumstances, this custody battle is a unique case, much like Michael, and will test the mettle of the judge handling the case. The factors are, the celebrity status of Michael Jackson, his family, his will naming Katherine as far back as 2002 as guardian, in the case of his death, and the youngest son “Blanket” (whose mother is unknown so far), and whose welfare the judge would also be forced to consider.

The circumstances surrounding the two children, Paris and Prince Michael, is that they were not the biological children of either Michael or Debbie Rowe. They were reportedly conceived through In Vitro Fertilization, from sperm of an unknown source, adding to the mystery. Michael has been the sole provider, and has reportedly paid Debbie Rowe millions of dollars, on two separate occasions, for legal custody of the children. Despite the payments, she did not lose parental rights.

The judge will have a balancing act to perform. How can the judge be fair in this case? Blanket the youngest son should be a factor in the decision. Would the court split up the children? This would occur if the court awarded the other two children to Debbie Rowe.

While Michael was alive, Debbie Rowe is seen on camera, stating that the children belong to Michael, and that she was only the vehicle that brought the children into the world.  Now these public statements on camera may be her undoing.  She was paid millions of dollars on two occasions, for giving birth to the two children, and lived a lavish lifestyle while she was married to, and lived with Michael for three years. She was not the “biological” mother, and sold those children to Michael. A parent getting divorced would not receive payments as part of her settlement for child support, if they are not the custodial parent. She was paid again in a later case in which her parental rights were restored. Michael deliberately excluded her in his Will and must have had legal advice on the issue. Now Michael has died, and this presents a new opportunity for her to get some more money. This is a “win win” situation for her, because she will likely be paid no matter how the court rules.  She stands to benefit more, if she is awarded the children, because, she will get millions in child support, and money to ensure that the children will continue to live the life to which they were accustomed. The children also benefit from 40 percent of Michael’s estate, which will be generating income for years to come.