Debbie Rowe -- Full House?
While we wait to see whether or not she mounts a battle for custody of her possibly biological children, Michael Jackson's ex-wife Debbie Rowe was spotted out at her mother's house yesterday after running errands. 
Relevant Posts
- Katherine Jackson Can Challenge Administrators (9/18/2009) (4433 comments)
- Debbie Rowe: Arnie Klein Is a Mystery (10/29/2009) (307 comments)
- Debbie Rowe -- TV Lies Worth $490k (10/17/2009) (173 comments)
- Judge Checks in on Michael Jackson's Kids (10/02/2009) (330 comments)
- MJ -- If Not for Kids He Would 'Choose Death' (9/26/2009) (1800 comments)
Reader Comments
(Page 1 of 8) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments1. God bless you Debbie!!
Posted at 10:51AM on Jul 4th 2009 by Excited
2. I have no problem with Ms. Rowe seeking guardianship of her own children. What I do take issue with is the over used word "SPOTTED". Every time I hear or read that someone was spotted I expect to see that they have spots all over their bodies. Whatever happened to "was seen"????
Posted at 12:14PM on Jul 4th 2009 by WTF
3. With all the 'millions' she received from Michael, you would think she wouldn't look like and dress like a homeless person!
Posted at 10:58AM on Jul 4th 2009 by Coryj
4. My god MJ could of had just about anyone birth his children this women is so unattractive and not even classy looking why did he choose this baby selling thing?
Posted at 11:37AM on Jul 4th 2009 by pls
5. She looks more grounded and sensible than anyone in the Jackson clan. I hope her children can at least get to know her, hopefully they have a long future ahead of them, and they will need someone to be there for them all the way, and I am thinking graduations, weddings, children, I don't think it will be the Jacksons.
I also wonder if the media and fans will always continue their interest in the children if they know for sure that they had no bio connection to MJ, but they are Debbie's.
I followed this from the beginning, and know that Debbie was forced out by the Jackson machine.
Posted at 11:15AM on Jul 4th 2009 by mulberry
6. this woman is just so ugly, on the outside and inside. urgh!
Posted at 11:09AM on Jul 4th 2009 by kurt
7. What difference does it make how Debbie Rowe dresses? I am sitting here in my living room in a pair of ugly green over-sized shorts, a peach colored top that is too big, too loud, too old. But inside is a decent, nice and generous human being. So let's not judge a person by their clothes. I am not homeless, I can afford to go out and buy new clothes, I just choose not to. Maybe Debbie Rowe chooses to spend her money on her animals instead of on designer clothes. After all, it is HER money. Yes, Michael gave it to her in return for something he wanted, but it is HER money.
Posted at 11:21AM on Jul 4th 2009 by viviana
8. Knowing now that there is NO blood connection between MJ and those children maybe that will help her in court of she decides to fight for custody of HER 2 kids. Yes she was paid to get out of the picture and sign away her parental rights....just like the families of the two kids who settled out of court. However, in Debbie's case the judge did NOT agree and NEVER terminated her rights. By law she is to get those children unless it would be detrimental to them. Detrimental??? I would say leaving them in the hands of the grandmother where undoubtedly MJ's money-grubbing father will be seems detrimental to me. Isn't he the reason Michael went crazy? It is public knowledge those kids did not want to run around with masks and blankets covering them. I mean I am sorry but there are ALOT of famous people having children now. Some just as famous as Micheal, there kids are okay. The media only started following him and reporting his Wacko Jacko crap because he was doing just that!
Posted at 11:28AM on Jul 4th 2009 by Terri
9. Got a TON of cash to birth 2 kids~looks like a homeless person!!!
BTW~You signed away your rights as a parent to those kids...why would you think the family would let you anywhere near them?! Money Whore!
Posted at 11:28AM on Jul 4th 2009 by MaryAnn14701
10. No she did NOT sign away her rights. Look it up. Man Michael was quick to pay people and incidents to just go away. If anybody was a whore it was him. Little Boy whore!
Posted at 11:31AM on Jul 4th 2009 by Terri
11. I would like to know what her shirt says, it looks like shes trying to hide the words. Maybe it says something sarcastic about getting money from men lol. I would want some kids too if I was no longer going to get something to the tune of $750,000 a year from their father, but now the kids were in line for all the money. No wonder why he said in his will that he doesn't leave anything to Debbie Rowe "no matter what she says", she would be expecting her money to continue rolling in. Seems like it's okay for her not to care to keep her kids with her as long as she's being paid, but as soon as that money runs out she wants the kids back? Or possibly just another way to get money. Problem is she has ruined her character for selling her kids for money and now she should be believed for her sincerity? hhhmmm
Posted at 11:31AM on Jul 4th 2009 by what
12. If she's the mother of two of those kids, shouldn't she be the LOGICAL choice for raising them? I also think they should all go together. Blanket may not be hers but he's part of the deal the way I see it.
Posted at 11:32AM on Jul 4th 2009 by Tyrone Jefferson
13. Considering how she looks, I think it's a safe bet that MJ was gay.
Posted at 2:44PM on Jul 4th 2009 by steve
14. Is that Debbie Rowe's face??? CAN'T SEE IT FOR THE GIANT DOLLAR SIGNS IN HER EYES!!! Back off those kids, money grubber-no one with sense thinks you should get them!
Posted at 11:42AM on Jul 4th 2009 by tish
15. the kids look JUST LIKE MJ!!!! HAHHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH
Posted at 11:40AM on Jul 4th 2009 by troubled young boy
