Michael Jackson - RIP

[KeleiGrrrl]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

Several legal experts have already chimed in, saying that it is likely that if Deborah Rowe wants her 2 children back, then the odds are in her favor unless Jackson's family can prove that custody under their mother would be harmful to the kids.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25702242-2,00.html

It should also be noted that while Rowe is a biological parent of both Prince Michael I and Paris, MJ was not. Rowe was impregnated through a sperm donor.

While it's all still conjecture at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if the Jackson's try to gain custody. Has it been established that MJ isn't the biological father of the kids? I know, I know...many people question whether he's their biological father, but I wasn't aware that it was a matter of record that someone else fathered the children. I thought the official story out there was that he conceived the kids with Rowe and that Blanket was conceived through artificial insemination via an unnamed surrogate.

If Rowe does seek custody, I wonder if she'll try to prove he wasn't their bio dad if that's really the case. I know legal experts are speculating she has an excellent chance at gaining custody if she wants it, but the Jackson's have a lot of influence. They're supposedly broke too, but they still have a lot of power and I could see them bulldozing all over her in court. The court system favors bio parents, I know, but this isn't a "typical" case and that family is still a force to be reckoned with I'd assume.

[Adri]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

I understand the noting of his death, the mourning of a lot of people over it, the fascination with his death for even people who don't particularly mourn it. I expect retrospectives on his accomplishments and his difficulties and opportunties for people to express what he meant to them or how his passing affected them or to talk about their relationship with him. but I am struck anew by the extremes of voyeurism that the media has gone to. Some "newspeople" are camped outside the home in which Jackson died reporting that there are moving vans and speculating as to what is being removed and why and whether this interferes with any investigation going on and promising to find out and let everyone know. Why? What difference does it make to the rest of the world? If the moving wasn't authorized and interferes with the investigation, the proper authorities will deal with it. Why do the rest of us need to know if his children really are his biological children or surrogate children? I get why the media are sometimes referred to as vultures but they do what they do because there's an interest in it from the public (this isn't aimed at anyone posting here but in general). Why do some people seem to think the public has a "right" to know every trivial detail such as what items were moved and why?

I am bothered as well by the avid speculation about what his children may inherit and what kinds of debts he may have had (again, not aimed at anyone posting here. KeleiGrrrl's post wasn't showing when I wrote this and I only saw it after I hit "send" *g*). None of anyone's business unless they were owed money by Jackson and/or think they should inherit something from him. Frankly, even the breathless revelations about the possible causes of death and what medical conditions he may or may not have had bother me because of the extremes of the coverage that is occurring. I mean, it's one thing for a bunch of friends to sit around going, "eh, I wonder what happened" but another for the almost round the clock media coverage on the progress of his autopsy and test results and speculating without much basis at this point on what he might have done or might have had that caused his death. I can see an announcement regarding whether there was foul play (serial murderer on the loose!) or if he died from something that posted a wide spread health hazard like the plague (and thus was part of an imminent effort to try to protect people from catching the plague) but otherwise, why do we need a blow by blow account on the progress of his autopsy? Why should his autopsy results be revealed to the public in any event unless again it was to try to prevent a major health crisis?

The U.S. has supposedly stringent laws protecting the privacy of health information. I wonder why it doesn't seem to apply to celebrities? Do we really need to know that David Carradine died with something tied to his genitals? I know Farrah Fawcett did her own documentary on her illness but I think I read it was prompted by some health care workers leaking her medical information to the media and the media publishing it so she decided to try to get some control back over what was being said about her but she would have preferred to have had her privacy. and yeah, the health workers got "punished" but they might not have done it and certainly the media might not have publicized it without the attitude that the public has a right to know all things. The extreme loss of privacy can be blown off as the price of celebrity but should it be? What does it say about us as a society that many think that we have a "right to know," even if only for purposes of titillation or to satisfy morbid curiosity, that trumps all else? /rant

[Vanguard]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

Michael Jackson's 9 Greatest Video Game Moments

The U.S. has supposedly stringent laws protecting the privacy of health information. I wonder why it doesn't seem to apply to celebrities? Do we really need to know that David Carradine died with something tied to his genitals?

Carradine died in Thailand. I'm not aware of anything equivalent to HIPAA laws in that country.

[Adri]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

Carradine died in Thailand. I'm not aware of anything equivalent to HIPAA laws in that country.

True that he died outside of the US. But that begs the question ~ does the public here really need to know that for anything other than "entertainment"? Doesn't Carradine have any right to privacy and to dignity in his death (since he didn't die in public such as running nekkid through the streets and then throwing himself into a bonfire or something like that).

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

But that begs the question ~ does the public here really need to know that for anything other than "entertainment"?

"Need"? It's never about "need" when it comes to the human fixation with celebrity; it's about "want" and about the huge amount of money to be made by those who can satisfy that "want." It is a drug, and to varying degrees, we are all addicts.

[cynsaligia]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

The U.S. has supposedly stringent laws protecting the privacy of health information. I wonder why it doesn't seem to apply to celebrities? Do we really need to know that David Carradine died with something tied to his genitals? I know Farrah Fawcett did her own documentary on her illness but I think I read it was prompted by some health care workers leaking her medical information to the media and the media publishing it so she decided to try to get some control back over what was being said about her but she would have preferred to have had her privacy. and yeah, the health workers got "punished" but they might not have done it and certainly the media might not have publicized it without the attitude that the public has a right to know all things. The extreme loss of privacy can be blown off as the price of celebrity but should it be? What does it say about us as a society that many think that we have a "right to know," even if only for purposes of titillation or to satisfy morbid curiosity, that trumps all else? /rant

you're not the only one who feels that way, adri. i don't think i could have put it better.

i'll add this: if the mechanism you use to make yourself feel superior is by standing on a soapbox to preach "cautionary tales" and looking down upon someone who is soon to be six feet under, then you must be a truly pathetic sort indeed.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

i'll add this: if the mechanism you use to make yourself feel superior is by standing on a soapbox to preach "cautionary tales" and looking down upon someone who is soon to be six feet under, then you must be a truly pathetic sort indeed.

*oof!*

(Picks self off the floor, dusts off, giggles at the pettiness of it all, and walks away.)

[Kaonohi]

Michael Jackson - Judgement Day!

if the mechanism you use to make yourself feel superior is by standing on a soapbox to preach "cautionary tales" and looking down upon someone who is soon to be six feet under, then you must be a truly pathetic sort indeed.

*oof!*

(Picks self off the floor, dusts off, giggles at the pettiness of it all, and walks away.)

Good one, FM. I almost believed you believed it until the pettiness part. (This is intended as 'friendly ribbing,' BTW. No offense.)

Often I think we humans are too often 'protective/parental,' imagining we know better. I've been on that soapbox often enough. We go on our experience, forgetting that other people may be different. Thank God they are. Neil Armstrong's mom probably told him not to go to the moon - "You'll break your neck!" Lucky we break away.

Michael took a strange path - to us - probably disobeyed his mom, but therein is fame. The willingness to 'go boldly where no one has gone before.' To go against the grain, throw caution to the winds and follow your dream.

It's an easy thing to stand back and do an 'Ann Landers.' To 'should (i.e., shit)' on people, telling them what they SHOULD do, according to you (generalizing people who give advice, not FM).

It is harder to try and achieve something, whether you win or fail, but there is the growth of society, knowledge, art and science.

Are we better off because Michael Jackson lived, and in living worked hard and took chances others would not? Or would we be better had he never lived?

Michael, if St. Pete denies you entrance, just turn your back on him and moonwalk through those Pearly Gates. Peter won't know what hit 'em.

[LikaNui]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

I haven't had time to read this thread, so perhaps someone has already mentioned this but... I always felt kinda sorry for MJ. He never got to have a childhood. His father was the stage parent from hell. MJ was never allowed to play with other kids or to have anything even close to a normal life. Kinda figures why he built Neverland when he was rich enough to afford his belated childhood.
Anyway. RIP, MJ.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Michael Jackson - What we can learn.

Good one, FM. I almost believed you believed it until the pettiness part. (This is intended as 'friendly ribbing,' BTW. No offense.)

Often I think we humans are too often 'protective/parental,' imagining we know better. I've been on that soapbox often enough. We go on our experience, forgetting that other people may be different. Thank God they are. Neil Armstrong's mom probably told him not to go to the moon - "You'll break your neck!" Lucky we break away.

Michael took a strange path - to us - probably disobeyed his mom, but therein is fame. The willingness to 'go boldly where no one has gone before.' To go against the grain, throw caution to the winds and follow your dream.

It's an easy thing to stand back and do an 'Ann Landers.' To 'should (i.e., shit)' on people, telling them what they SHOULD do, according to you (generalizing people who give advice, not FM).

Your point is taken. But just to make it clear about where I was coming from:

I think that if someone took the time to carefully read what I was getting at rather than using it as a convenient excuse to take a cheap shot at me, they would know that my point wasn't to totally demonize MJ. He was, as I said, extraordinarily talented. He used his fame and generously devoted some of his resources to help others who were less fortunate than him. (Co-writing We Are The World and participating in the USA For Africa project was just one of many charitable efforts he would be involved in.)

But as rich and influential as he had become, MJ was human, like the rest of us. And he had his flaws, just like us. Which is why I earlier referred to how common some of those flaws were. For example, which of us here have never been guilty of vanity at some point? We wish there was something we could change about ourselves. But we either shrug it off and come to terms with the hand we were dealt with,.... or if we have the necessary resources and dedication, we might explore a nip/tuck job on our faces and/or bodies. There is nothing abnormal about that.

If you're like most people with limited $$$$, these kinds of procedures are not something that you can do a whim. It is something that has to be saved up for. And as a result, it is something that has to be carefully studied and considered. Thank goodness for that! But for the few who have the money to indulge their every wish and to have them carried out at their whim,..... as I said, that can be very self-destructive. MJ is the perfect example of what I am talking about, although there are others (albeit less extreme examples) who have allowed themselves to be mutilated by a botched surgery or that "one" operation from which there would be no return.

Not every fabulously rich person have let the trappings of wealth destroy them or turned them into tragic figures. But at the same time, there's no denying the Elvises, Howard Hughes, and Doris Dukes who ended their lives with tons of money at their disposal,..... but few (if any) real friends they could trust and confide in.

[mel]

Re: Michael Jackson - What we can learn.

Media infatuation with the ongoing Michael Jackson story?

1. Ratings
2. Eyeballs
3. Advertising
4. Money

[tutusue]

Re: Michael Jackson - What we can learn.

[...] But for the few who have the money to indulge their every wish and to have them carried out at their whim,..... as I said, that can be very self-destructive.[...]

Without certain celebrity-seeking, money-hungry doctors there would be less additive prescriptions written and less over-the-top plastic surgery performed. I give equal blame to that segment of the medical community. Kind of analogous to the sub-prime lending mess. It wasn't only the home buyers at fault for getting in over their heads...but also the lenders for allowing, even encouraging, it.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Michael Jackson - What we can learn.

Without certain celebrity-seeking, money-hungry doctors there would be less additive prescriptions written and less over-the-top plastic surgery performed. I give equal blame to that segment of the medical community.

Very true. Although in the Jackson case, there's still a lot of unanswered questions. The results of the toxicology tests won't be released for another 6-8 weeks. There's the question of how many doctors MJ had. If he was visiting several who were giving him prescriptions, this might have enabled the singer to accumulate a lethal combination/amount of drugs. And of course, an investigation would have to be made to look into whether the drugs that killed Jackson were, in fact, prescribed to him, or were they someone else's medication.

[Kaonohi]

Re: Michael Jackson - What we can learn.

Your point is taken. But just to make it clear about where I was coming from:

I think that if someone took the time to carefully read what I was getting at rather than using it as a convenient excuse to take a cheap shot at me, they would know that my point wasn't to totally demonize MJ.

"Frankie's Market has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space."

sooooo.....

Read your post 55 on MJ. I didn't see any cheap shot taken at you - maybe I wasn't involved enough.

I thought your points in the latest post are relevent to the topic and enlightening about human nature. Hope who ever it was that took the 'cheap shot' learns from it.

Kudos.

[cynsaligia]

Re: Michael Jackson - RIP

i'll add this: if the mechanism you use to make yourself feel superior is by standing on a soapbox to preach "cautionary tales" and looking down upon someone who is soon to be six feet under, then you must be a truly pathetic sort indeed.

*oof!*

(Picks self off the floor, dusts off, giggles at the pettiness of it all, and walks away.)

i find it absolutely fascinating that you, for whatever reason, felt utterly compelled to respond to what i said. interesting.

back to MJ--i'm completely turned off by the media circus surrounding his death and have assiduously avoided watching or listening to the ubiquitous tributes or post-mortem evaluations. didn't care to watch similar treatments of princess diana back in the day, so i'm quite sure my lack of interest has little to do with what i do for a living and the resulting tendency to feel people should have their privacy when they're ill or they die. i'm not really affected by MJ's death, even tho as a child, i'd performed his music and, as an adult, admire the breadth of his talent. it's sad that he's died....but to me, not more sad that if one of my neighbors or a patient at work passed away. call me callous and unappreciative of one of the great pop talents of our time...i just don't feel much of anything and am amazed by the near-shrieking i've heard on the radio by fans or the hysteria i've seen on tv just as i change the channel.

i guess for me, grief is an emotion i feel only for when losing someone for whom i made an emotional investment for and i'm long past emotionally invested in MJ or any of the other jacksons. i can't help but wonder where the line between mass grief and faux devotion at death, if one exists, lies.