Blind Item Revealed + one more

Oct 04, 2012 14:43

Daughter Is Holding Up The Engagement


Read more... )

jason segel, marcia cross, michelle williams, blind item

Leave a comment

xdecadentx October 4 2012, 13:46:07 UTC
Didn't Angelina initially say that about Brad and Maddox and now I think he has legal rights?

I can see her feelings on it, I'd probably be the same way, but it might change at some point.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

xdecadentx October 4 2012, 18:54:37 UTC
IDK why I thought it took a while. Hmm.

Reply

littlepunkryo October 4 2012, 15:22:53 UTC
I don't think so, Brad adopted Maddox (and Zahara) not all that long after they got together.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

chilli_cheese October 4 2012, 19:06:30 UTC
Can I just say that I love that their last name is Jolie-Pitt? I love that it seems so natural to included Angelina's name in their last name instead of automatically going Pitt (of course, she adopted them first).

Reply

jinxeh13 October 4 2012, 17:42:35 UTC
Yeah, but that's a bit different; they've been together for years, and have other children (biologically and otherwise) together. At that point, it's more of a, "why not?" situation? Michelle could decide to go that route eventually, but they haven't been together long at all, so I don't blame her for being cautious for now.

Reply

fraubluecher October 4 2012, 18:09:42 UTC
Plus Maddox has no other father.

Reply

xdecadentx October 4 2012, 18:53:49 UTC
That's what I meant. She might think that now because they haven't been together that long, but it doesn't mean she'll always feel that way.

After this long if I was Michelle I'd be doing the same thing.

Reply

tobiveil12 October 4 2012, 18:24:33 UTC
except Maddox was no one's child no offense to the birth mom. Matilda's father had every intention on being in her life and died. TO let anyone adopt her at any time would be disrespectful and shameful.

Reply

jmfunnyface October 4 2012, 18:42:46 UTC
I don't know, I don't think it's that bad--at least from a legal standpoint. What if they get married & he doesn't adopt her, and something happens to Michelle in five years? He could be a part of her daily life, yet Matilda's relatives on both sides (Michelle's & Heath's) could fight for custody being her next of kin. With the amount of money Matilda stands to inherit, relatives would be coming out of the woodworks. Not only do you lose both your mom and dad, but you could be taken away from the person who has been a part of your daily life for years because he isn't biologically related to you.

Reply

tobiveil12 October 4 2012, 18:46:08 UTC
I always though that your living will takes precedent over next of kin. If MIchelle really wanted to have jason be the sole care taker after she untimely passes. Then by her will Jason could receive the kid. Her father's family are pretty great though. Matilda wasn't supposed to get anything because he will was made before her conception, but they made sure to give up all their money to her.

Reply

jmfunnyface October 4 2012, 18:50:48 UTC
From what I've understood, you can have a living will, but that doesn't always guarantee that it won't end up in a court battle that involves the child--especially when there are money hunger people involved who think they can drag it out for years because they'll eventually get the money (in their own minds). Look at the situation with the Jackson family. People do crazy shit when there's loads of money to be had.

Isn't Michelle's dad a piece of work too? Something like he was on the run for tax evasion?

I'm not saying Jason is doing it for the reasons I'd be concerned, but it would be something that I'd want to talk about seriously with a future spouse.

Reply

tobiveil12 October 4 2012, 18:58:52 UTC
Surely the courts would never put Michelle's father in charge of MAtilda if he has that kind of record. Those things are very much put into consideration when they are looking for a fit parent. And It was always my knowledge that when you have an inheritance it could be locked for that child's use until they become a certain age to take it themselves. The estate my pay the person for their care of the child, but that does't mean they get the money.

Reply

xdecadentx October 4 2012, 18:51:45 UTC
Maddox was Angelina's child. I don't really get your point here. If one parent dies/is absent a child shouldn't be allowed to be adopted by the other parent's spouse?

Reply

tobiveil12 October 4 2012, 18:55:50 UTC
I know he was Angelina's but the 2 instance s are not the same. Angelina adopting a kid, then sometime later marrying someone else and that spouse adopting the kid is different Then Michelle and HEath having a kid together and then he DIES, she gets a soon to be spouse and he wants to adopt her. Maddox never lost a parent! The whole thing is in poor taste. And no if the parent is absent due to neglect or some shit then adoption is fine, but when the parent is dead ,yes it's not right.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up