Debbie Rowe, surrogate mother to Michael Jackson’s two oldest children, is now bucking for custody of all three of the surviving Jackson tots.

Rowe carried and delivered Michael Joseph and Paris-Michael, impregnated with both via IVF (in vitro fertilization). She recently stepped forward to say she was not just the surrogate of the children but the biological mother of both. It’s still unclear whether or not Michael Jackson is the biological father of any of the three children to whom he was the primary caregiver. Rowe never had custody of the two children…but now, she wants it. Not just that, she’s bucking to get custody of the youngest Jackson child as well.

The mysterious “Blanket” Jackson was born to an unknown surrogate, whose identity has never been revealed. Nor has any woman stepped forward to make a claim to the child, so Rowe says she’s willing to take him on as well - in the interest of the kids, of course. It should be noted that Michael Jackson’s will mentions Debbie Rowe very distinctly. The document says she won’t inherit a single thing from the King of Pop, and Michael indicates this was purposefully done. 

Per court ruling, Jackson’s mother Katherine has been granted custody of all three of her son’s children, but the decision is up for discussion again later this month. Debbie Rowe says she’s willing to submit to testing to solidify her custody claim, both DNA and psychological.

Legally, what are her rights? There is no actual physical evidence that Jackson is biologically the father of any of his three kids. If it’s proved that he is not, even this doesn’t automatically preclude the Jackson family from their legal claim on the kids. Jackson’s will clearly indicates whom he wants to serve as the guardian for his brood of three, and since Michael was the legal father of all three this has merit. Even if Debbie Rowe is proven to be the biological mother of the two oldest, she clearly is not the mother - nor has even been - of the youngest. This leaves very little room for Rowe to make a claim on the youngest, and courts don’t like to split up siblings even in the midst of convoluted custody issues.