Jackson Kids May Not Know Who Their Mom Is

Former Jackson Publicist Also Says He Doubts Debbie Rowe Will Cause Big Custody Row

(CBS)  Michael Jackson's children might not know who their mother is, and his two oldest definitely don't think Debbie Rowe is, according to a former Jackson publicist.

Stuart Backerman, who held that post nearly two years, from 2002 to 2004 -- a tough couple years for Jackson that included child molestation allegations and the infamous baby-dangling incident -- told "Early Show" features reporter and weather anchor Dave Price Friday, "I'm not sure exactly who they think their mother is. That was never discussed [with me]. But I do know that they didn't think Debbie Rowe was their mother. They were told Debbie was either a friend or a relative."

Rowe is the birth mother of Jackson's two eldest kids: Prince Michael, 12, and Paris, 11. But Harvey Levin of the celebrity Web site TMZ.com has told CBS News, "Rowe wasn't the biological mother, and was implanted, and carried the babies to term."

A Los Angeles TV station reported Thursday that Rowe plans to seek custody of Prince Michael and Paris, and offered to take a DNA test to prove she is the biological mother. Her attorney, however, tells CBS News Rowe hasn't decided yet what she'll do.

A judge on Thursday delayed a guardianship hearing for Jackson's children at the request of attorneys for Rowe and the singer's mother. The new hearing date is July 13.

In his will, Jackson designates his mother, Katherine Jackson, to be the guardian of his children, with longtime friend and singing superstar Diana Ross named as the next choice if his mother is unable or unwilling to care for the children, reports CBS News correspondent Priya David.

---

Complete coverage of Jackson's death

---

Rowe gave up her parental rights in 2001 and was paid a multi-million dollar settlement, reports CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy. At the time of Jackson's molestation trial in 2005 Rowe tried to regain her rights, but was paid another settlement.

"As far as Michael was concerned, Debbie was sort of a surrogate mother and that she was not to be involved in the children's lives," says CBS News consultant J. Randy Taraborrelli.

Backerman told Price Friday a bitter custody battle is unlikely. "It's speculative," he said, "because I'm not exactly sure what Debbie is thinking now. But you have to understand that Debbie came to Michael's support on two critical occasions: one, after the (journalist) Martin Bashir (2003) interview, when she came to mitigate the concerns about Michael being around children, when she said Michael wouldn't harm any child. And that was tremendously helpful to Michael at that time. And then, secondly, during the (molestation) trial. A lot of people would say it was Debbie Rowe's testimony, and the way she testified, that saved Michael at that trial.

"So, I don't really think that Debbie Rowe wants to stir the pot with this custody issue. I think it was Michael's wish that his mother be the custodial parent, look after the children. And, because she cared for Michael very, very much and, as I said, came to his support on a number of occasions, I'd really be surprised if she stirred the pot here and created a real furor, because that furor would ultimately have an impact on the children, and I don't think she wants to see that happen."

CBS News legal analyst Lisa Bloom told Price Friday that, "as the biological mother (assuming Rowe is), she clearly is first in line under California law. She gets preference. She gets those children, unless Katherine Jackson or someone else can show she's an unfit mother. And that, Bloom said, is a very difficult legal standard to meet.

As for chances that Jackson's father, Joe Jackson, could get custody if he seeks it, Bloom said, "Joe Jackson has been accused of being a child abuser by Michael Jackson on videotape and by others over the years. And Debbie Rowe wants a restraining order to keep Joe Jackson potentially away from those children. These are the kinds of things a court would take into account in a custody battle. Everything would come into evidence. You can expect private investigators to be hired. All the life history of both sides to be looked into.

"This could be quite a battle."

[John_Merritt]

'Kids May not Know whole their Mom is'. That's choice. From what I understand of what I have read, they also don't know who their father is either. Because none of them were MJ's natural kids. I am still waiting for them to reach an age where they can write their own stories, then maybe we can all have a greater picture of MJ as a father and not the 'star'.

[hydethem]

I think that you need to speak with the kids and find out how they feel. Please let them heal before start moving them around. I am certain Debbie would be just as fit as Micheal to have the children. They should not be lied to and they should know who their mother is; afterall they know who their father is. Children just want to be loved and understand. Bury Michale first. He did like children and know we move forward. He should be left alone and be at peace after all thats all he wanted. Rest in piece Michael you were well loved.
Regarding his burial your spirt is a Neverland. Do not let the public know where his body is. There will be a private viewing what else do they want. Enough is enough... Give Michael the respect he deserve.. LOL Michael...

[bobnen]

Debbi R is a big fool.After abandoning the kids for more than 10yrs,only to emerge from the shadows again because of their wealth.She probably going to sell them or even kill them to gain total control of their wealth.She should be ashamed of herself to abandone her children for the sake of money.If she really loved them why did she accept money and abandon them in the first place.She is a wolf in sheep clothing.Micheals will should to kept to the letter, so their grand ma should care for them. FINALE

[John_Merritt]

Being the lawyer that you pretend to be, can I add something? She did not abandon them as much as she kept to the 'letter of the law' in that she bore the children, she was compensated, and she left the children with MJ as they agreed.

For you to say she is going to 'kill them to claim their inheritance' is sicked and twisted. The whole thing was a financial arrangement disquised as a quasi-romance (at one time), but that was to make both of them appear more human. Which is OK. It was their arrangement, and it worked for awhile. Now the judge will have to decide what is best for the children. Grandma, Debbie or someone else.

Stay tuned, the next chapter unfolds.

[carolhill814]

This is horrible story all the way around and of course the children will get hurt in this entire story they grew up thinking that Michael was there dad and now we all know and knew that from the very start but some how they didn't care because all they knew that he loved them and to any child that is what is so important and that is the most important fact.
This woman has already said she didn't want to their mother and she didn't want them to call her mother does this sound familiar his dad didn't want him to call him dad either so he kne what it felt like not to be loved. He paid her big bucks for her to stay away from the children and that should be honored no matter what. What I want to know how come he never adopted them that part I can't understand at all.
This man loved these children like he was never loved and they want to take these children away from a home who wants them and loves them that makes no sence at all.

MAY GOD BLESS THESE THREE INNOCENT CHILDREN NOW AND FOR ALL TIME AS I AM SURE HE WILL!!!

[seabeach-2009]

How do you know what the kids know and what they do not know? Is there a stroy somewhere about it

[bajajohn1]

Ususally, Kids have problems knowing who their father may be.

[roaringwave]

What people do for money! Debbie Rowe is now after the kids for money. Plain and simple. I believe that the kids (which don't have a drop of Michael's blood), should remain in the Jackson family nonetheless. Or, give the kids to Debbie but not the money. The estate belongs to the Jacksons, who created him. And as far as Joe Jackson being abusive, give me a break.... every family disciplines their kids! Joe wasn't that bad of a father. I think that he did right by his kids.He made them a success single-handedly. All the negative banter about him needs to be de-bunked as far as I'm concerned. It is highly over-exaggerated. He is a great father who loves his children.
Debbie Rowe on the other hand is all about the money. She will sell her soul to Satan for a few bucks! She is probably running out of money and wants to sustain her livelihood by retrieving those two kids. She is nothing but a surrogate anyways. Personally, I think that certain media-folks and others don't want to see the Jackson family raise the kids because they are white. I don't think that this argument would be the same had the kids been black.

[orsands]

"Joe wasn't that bad of a father. I think that he did right by his kids.He made them a success single-handedly"

If your idea of success is raising a son so psychologically damaged that he essentially carves up his face because all he ever heard was his father calling him ugly...and your idea of success is when your child is 40 years old and is spending millions of dollars building a home that looks like something a ten year old would want...complete with the ten year old play mates...then frankly your idea of good parenting is sick. Entertainnment success will never justify what Joe Jackson did to those kids. What good did the money do for Michael? Did it buy him happiness? Michael never escaped the bonds of that abuse. Why do you think his drugs of choice were all about numbing? He simply wanted to be free of the pain. And in the end...death was the only way he could achieve that and finally be free. I take my hat off to all the average Joes out there that let their children play and have their childhoods instead of seeing them as their meal ticket. Especially those that cherish and openly love their children. Fathers like Joe Jackson push their kids for their own selfish motivation. Joe Jackson lived off his children and continues to do so...like some cancerous lesion that feeds off it's host.

Listen to Michael's words himself in an interview he had with Oprah. He still sounds scared of Joes and tries to reassure his father he loves him while obviously trying to come to terms with someone he probably hates at the same time. When as and adult he is still literally vomiting if he thinks his father is coming into the room...I think it's safe to say that Joe Jackson didn't just spank his kids like most parents did during that time. He went far beyond that and as a result-all of his children suffered in their own repective adulthoods.

Oprah: Why so sad? Because on stage you were performing, you were getting your Grammys. Why so sad?
Michael: Oh, there's a lot of sadness about my past and adolescence, about my father and all of those things.
Oprah: So he would tease you, make fun of you.
Michael: Yes.
Oprah: Would he...did he ever beat you?
Michael: Yes.
Oprah: And why would he beat you?
Michael: He saw me, he wanted me, I guess...I don't know if I was his golden child or whatever, but he was very strict, very hard, very stern. Just a look would scare you.
Oprah: And were you scared of him?
Michael: Very. Like, there's been times when he'd come to see me, I'd get sick, I'd start to regurgitate.
Oprah: As a child or as an adult?
Michael: Both. He's never heard me say this. I'm sorry, please don't be mad at me.

[andie52]

These children have been so psychologically damaged by MJ that they may never recover. He brainwashed them all of their lives.

Dec.23, 2005


It?s too bad she didn?t win that case but how would she compete with MJ?s high-priced lawyers and his money?


US authorities are investigating claims that Michael Jackson deceived officials about his custody status in order to obtain passports for his three children.
The mother of Prince Michael I and Paris, Debbie Rowe is currently suing Jackson for custody of the children and has claimed he abducted them in order to take them to his Bahrain hideaway.
Rowe has allegedly filed a lawsuit that will mean a court order will force Jackson to return the children to the US.
Yesterday it was reported in TMZ that Jackson could face abduction charges if he fails to return to the US with the two children.
Jackson has a third child Prince Michael II, the mother of the child is unknown?poor kids.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1545934/posts

[seabeach-2009]

Did you not read that she was paid multi million dollar settlements twice. Her concern was for the money not the children. I am not sure who the best person is for the kids. How do you know that these children have been psychologically damaged, have you been reading the National Enquirer.

[toldyouso29]

..or who their dad really is. They can join the rising number of kids being made from donor eggs, donor sperm or donor embryos. They usually don't know genetically who made them either. Ah...the benefits of science. LOL

[orsands]

I hope she does create a battle for those kids. I admire her for stepping up to the plate, especially if she plans on limiting the kids exposure to Joe Jackson. Good for her. She's got more of a protective bone in her left pinkie than Katherine Jackson has in her entire body. Leave those kids in Joe and Katherine's custody-it wouldn't be long before he would be "training" them for the stage like he did he own kids. Which, according to Michael, was his dad sitting in front of them while holding a thick belt in his lap-ready to whip which ever kid wasn't performing up to his expectations.

Katherine and Joe had their chance to raise their own children and in the words of their own children-they failed miserably. Joe beat them almost sadistically and Katherine failed to protect them. She is just as much to blame as Joe for the abuse, if not more because she could have him arrested or she could have left with the kids. Instead she turned her back and let Joe abuse her children and covered for him despite the children having obvious bruising and injuries from the beatings. Joe treated her just as bad by having multiple affairs and at least one child out of wedlock. We might have more respect for Katherine if she had woke up at some point and kicked that low life husband of hers to the curb a long time ago but she hasn't had the backbone to even divorce him despite filing for divorce twice. One of the last times all the Jackson kids were together was to 'celebrate' their parent's 60 yr anniversary-so Joe and Katherine are clearly still together and I have no doubt who runs the show when push comes to shove. If Katherine got formal custody-doesn't it stand to reason the Joe would also get custody by default also since they're still married? Does anyone really think Michael wanted his children to be raised by his father? Or for his father to start pimping Michaels children out on the stage like he did his own kids? He's a leech that only saw his children as moneymakers and he will use his grandchildren the same way and probably try and promote them as the "reincarnation of Michael Jackson" if he gets his hands on them. Look at the news coverage coming from the Encino Jackson compound-who's been front and center every day as the 'spokesman' for the family? Joe Jackson...who using every photo op to promote his new record label. He's still using Michael even in his death. Total scum bag.
And the last thing Michael's children need is to lose another parent figure until they are well into their twenties and have a solid footing on life. Katherine is almost 80yr of age. If she would happen to pass away-who would they be shipped off to next? Janet? LaToya?
Debbie Rowe never sought the spotlight and still avoids it. And since there are a ton of women who have acted as a surrogate for infertile couples or for people who want to adopt-then why is she being trashed for doing the same thing? Debbie made a promise to Michael that she would step back and let him raise the children. She never tried to renegotiate that arrangement and try and force him to let her have a relationship with the kids. She obviously believed that Michael was going to be a very devoted and loving parent and she was willing to put their needs above hers. Sounds just like the type of person these children finally need to be with if there is any hope of them having a somewhat normal life instead of being used like their father was by his parents.

[toldyouso29]

I agree with a lot of what you have said--but you left out the stories of Joe raping his children including Michael. LaToya said it first and it was almost 10 years later before Reebie and Janet admitted that for much of what LaToya said--she was telling the truth. LaToya said her dad would go into the boys and girls' rooms at night and molest them, sometimes also having sex with them, the kids lived in fear every night and at some point Katherine knew. If she turned a blind eye to her hubby walking the halls at night, she knew when LaToya and Janet and Reebie confirm this--but like a lot of weak women, there she still sits even though by then, she had the money to leave.

I suspect Joe broke her will. On the other hand, there is nothing about Debbie Rowe to indicate she would be a good parent and should have custody--just because she carried those children does not mean she has any connection to them. If they were not made with her eggs and she was just a surrogate she has NO claim to them. Perhaps Janet or another sibling could raise them--maybe one of the ones who did not go into show business--whatever the case, Joe must not be allowed near them and as much as possible, should not have access to any of Michael's money or assets, either--but no one who has their eyes on that money should get those children. Not even Debbie Rowe

[seabeach-2009]

Are you ignorant. Back when Michael and his brothers and sisters were growing the laws were not the same. You could not have your husband arrested. How do you know what kind of parent Debbie Rowe is going to be. Any kind of mother would not give up her children as she did. As far as Joe goes. How do you know what kind of person he is now. People tend to soften as they grow older. This whole thing makes me sick. People judging others when they do not even know the people they are talking about.

[orsands]

I think you are the ignorant one. There certainly were laws on the books about child abuse when Michael was a child. We're not talking about the 1920's for God's sake-we talking about the 1970's. How long do you think Child Protective Services has been around? And the laws about child abuse in California have always been progressive and way ahead of the rest of the country. To the point where good ole Joe would have definitely been arrested for the abuse Michael described. All Katherine would have had to done was drive two or three of the kids to the police station and file a report and have photos taken of their injuries. Normally kids with bruises all over them are discovered when they go to school and someone sees the bruises-but Michael and his siblings were home schooled and of course no one in the 'entertainment business' was going to say anything about the kid's injuries because everybody was trying to cash in on the kids. Quit making excuses for the abuser and for the woman who enabled him to abuse their children. Perhaps if there weren't so many people willing to justify Joe and Katherine's behavior back when Michael was a child-then maybe the abuse would have stopped. Michael became an icon not because of Joe Jackson, but despite him. God only knows what heights he might have achieved if he hadn't had such horrible parents.

[TryTakingMyMoney]

"men have very vivid sexual dreams while under Propofol anesthesia"...Well, maybe since he lost Neverland he was trying to fill the void with this drug. Sounds like his perversion cost him 22 million and his life. Folks, It's time to stop idolizing this sick person! You're stating to remind me of liberals and the media idolizing our socialist messiah. Time to get back to destroying America.

[carolhill814]

Michael might have been a sick person but look who drove him to it his father. Can you imagine always being abused and hit if you don't perform the way dad wanted you to and if in his eyes you did badly you would get hit starting at the age of five (5) years old.
Can you imagine when you call your father dad he says to you I am not your dad call me Joe what kind of thing is that for a child at five to hear that on a continual basis.
He loved his neverland because that was the one place he was so totally happy I not saying he was not wrong if he did something to those young boys but he wanted a friend he never grew up from the age of five (5) that is what you have to consider.
He needed a lot of help but everyone around him only saw the money that he was earning not what he really needed all of his life love without any strings attached.

[mahdeealoo]

The kids are potentially almost old enough to choose who they wish to be "their parents". Isn't the age 14? But for the young lady, 3-4 years in the wrong hands can certainly destroy her life. It seems that Ms. Rowe is after the dollar bills and not the million dollar babies or she would have used every last penny and a DNA test by now. Too little too late IMO.