So is it actually possible for a black man to have white, blonde, blue eyed children?

[nykkieberry]

Michael Jackson seems to say it is? Everyone doubts it but is it medically possible? And how can some one who seems so apparently unhinged (the way he jiggled and smothered that child!) be allowed to care for children?

[mikewith]

It's certainly possible for a 'black' parent to have 'white' children.... though that very statement highlights just how subjective those terms are! Blue eyes, blonde hair, pale skin... all inherited characteristics. Jacko quite correctly pointed out that skin tones vary widely, though he was disengenous at best with regard to his own changing appearance. MJ's father does indeed have blue eyes, as do many people of colour. (Referring to the programme, I would point out that the eldest child appeared to have bleached hair -- his roots were showing in at least one shot in the shopping mall; perhaps not unexpected given the father's general appearance.)

As for the second part of your question... well, money and celebrity appear to justify an awful lot, don't they? Interesting to see if there's any response from the authorities to all this.

[incitatus]

I dont think Ive ever seen a single parent I wouldnt regard as unhinged. Its the lack of sleep I think. He can be the father...just because he appears black (or used to ) doesnt mean he cant have the genes for blue eyes, blonde hair etc, possibly from a white ancestor. The corollary often occurs, apparently caucasian parents have a black child, then find they each had a black great great great grandfather. Its a function of recessive genes.

[comloulou]

Well I found it all quite disturbing, the way he was jiggling that baby was very hyper and anxious-looking. He really does live in his own world but i cant see how thats going to be any good for his children, it'll be history repeating... so he doesnt beat them but my god what an upbringing. Can I just say also that i have never in my life seen a less 'sexual' person. I dont mean that flipantly, I mean there was just not one iota of self sexual awareness or presence. It was very odd.

[coemgen]

"I dont think Ive ever seen a single parent I wouldnt regard as unhinged" A rather sweeping, unsubstantiated statement wouldn't you say?

[Miss Zippy]

Yes, 'black' parents can have 'white' children and vice versa if one or more of the parents has a recessive gene. I had a long relationship with a mixed race man, who had pale skin and green eyes, and his extended family came in a wide range of beautiful colours, with some of his 'dark' cousins having 'white' children and vice versa! I didn't think Jacko came across nearly as 'wacko' as I was expecting in the programme. Comloulou mentioned that he didn't have any 'sexual awareness or presence' and I think this is just due to the fact that he is so child-like. As to his parenting abilities, who's to say what qualities make a perfect parent? You could say that at least his children aren't witnessing him injecting himself with drugs/gorging himself with booze every night etc etc.? He did look a bit awkward when handling his baby, but, to me, he seems genuinely devoted to them. The only bit that did 'disturb' me was that it appears he tells his children that they have no mother. Talking of mother, if we're going to criticise MJ, then what about Debbie Reynolds, the mother of Paris and Prince Michael I?

[comloulou]

Debbie Rowe. Dont think debbie reynolds had anything to do with jacksons sperm

[darth vader]

He is a rather sick person who should in no way be connected with children - if he was living on the next housing estate he would have been arrested and had his children put into care.

My wife is an ex-single parent and even before i met her she was very much hinged. Certainly she doesn't sit shaking the beJesus out of our baby when she feeds him, nor wrap a blanket over his head. And i don't remember her inviting the next door neighbours kids round for a "sleep-over" in our bedroom

[nykkieberry]

I totally agree. As a single mother who was left 'holding the baby' literally when my son was 9 months old I find it incredibly insulting to be labelled unhinged and to have my parenting skills compared to that of MJ. His money appears to cushion his bizarre behaviour as ecentric and defendable. If he was the guy in the next street, shaking his baby and inviting young boys to sleepovers I dare say he would be up in front of social services. He is a sad product of a cruel childhood and resulting fame. the worrying thing is, in his own selfish search for his lost childhood, he is sacrificing anothers. What chance have those children got? And how truly 'loving' is he? I also felt very uncomfortable about the fact he could easily spend the cost of life saving medical equipment for a child on a chess set! And running from a hosipital with a child still covered in the placenta - what's that all about?

[Miss Zippy]

DV, glad your wife was very much hinged "even before she met" you! Always a bonus in a potential spouse! You're right about the covering up of the childrens' faces though; it can't be conducive to fostering their self esteem and you can't help but wonder if they will grow up thinking their faces are something to be ashamed of and end up having loads of surgery like their father.

[Miss Zippy]

Yes, he did run out of the hospital with his baby still covered in placenta, but who let him do it? The baby's mother and the hospital staff, not to mention a hugely expensive legal team who would have orchestrated the whole "affair". He is not just the product of a sad childhood, but also the sycophants he is surrounded by. That's my only justification for defending him, because he is literally like a child being allowed to raid the whole sweet shop (if you catch my analogy!).

[incitatus]

coemgen:"A rather sweeping, unsubstantiated statement wouldn't you say?" yes. It wass a generalisation and therefore undefendable, but no parent ever acts rationally with respect to their own children. Or not all the time. Witness the fuss over various vaccinations. Rationally even the most dangerous vaccination routinely given to children is less dangerous than the disease it is for, but parents will refuse it on the basis of emotion. Look at child murder. The child murder rate has remained absolutely static for the last 150 years (per head of population) yet people believe otherwise. So they keep their child at home, which is the riskiest place as far as child murder is concerned, but then that is a rational judgment......Im not saying its right or wrong, Im just saying it happens.