- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
They were speculating last night on CNN that she probably didn't have a will. The person said most younger people never think of wills. He also said that her lawyer friend probably didn't insist on it.
Dee
Anna Nicole Smith Dead at 39
- Thread starter SailorGalaxia518
- Start date
Dee
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
Considering how long Howard has known her, and her habits I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't insist on a will...
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2004
As with many "high profile" cases, do you think we'll ever know the REAL 100% truth? It is doubtful she had a will, but one can hope. Reminds me DH and I REALLY need to change ours!
Did I hear something about somebody else has come forward saying they are/could be the father of the baby...I thought it was the son or grandson of some star...I should pay more attention the the news so I sound like I know what I'm talking about!
Did I hear something about somebody else has come forward saying they are/could be the father of the baby...I thought it was the son or grandson of some star...I should pay more attention the the news so I sound like I know what I'm talking about!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
True, most young people don't think of wills. However, people with money do and most parents tend to consider it. A lot of people have speculated that her companion/alleged father of the baby was using her and as a lawyer, he would have wanted a will written to protect his interests. All specualtion on my end. It is possible that she wouldn't have updated her will since her son's death.
If she doesn't have a will, (at least in NY state) only her parents and her children would have legal claim to her estate. Not sure what the laws are at her legal address.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2003
Prince Frederick is still married to Zsa Zsa.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
What about that anyway. Does a DNA test suddenly mean the Father can come out of the woods and just take her. That is like my parents adopting me and my birth mom just showing up and taking me away. Oh and to add if they found out I had a trust-fund set up. Deplorable.
Howard is Dad.:yes: JMO
Howard is Dad.:yes: JMO
I'm sick of all the media coverage and speculation and sensationalism. The truth is, no one outside of Anna knew all of her problems. She desperately needed help (which should've been obvious to anyone), and it seems like no one in her whole world cared enough to do it. I think she's a sad case, and a prime example of what can happen when you isolate yourself from your family and surround yourself with "yes-men" who don't have your best interests at heart.
And who do I feel worst of all for? That baby. Poor thing. Who's really interested in what's best for her, and who's busy seeing dollar signs and thinking how they can cash in?
I don't think your example is applicable to this case. I think what's key is that Larry Birkhead never gave up this child, as the birth mother in your example would have done. He has argued that this is his child BEFORE she was born. Anna and Howard then went to the Bahamas, where they were outside American jurisdiction, in my belief, to avoid going in for testing.
Also, you have to remember the age of the baby. At 5 months, she won't have any memory of Howard (and sadly, Anna) if she is removed from his custody. That's a lot different than if she is 6, 8, 10, or 12 years old, when she would have established a relationship with him. Establishing who the real father is now and giving her over to him (if it's not Howard) would be less traumatic than waiting a couple years down the line.
If Howard is the father, take the damn test and prove it. His unwillingness to do so indicates to me that he knows he's not the father. And regardless of how much he loves this child (which he really could), he has no right to separate a father and his child, who didn't give up the child OR his rights to the child and who he has tried to see since her birth.
Custody isn't like that old adage "Possession is 9/10ths of the law." The baby has a right to know who her father is and have a relationship with him.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
I tend to agree with Gwendolyn in this scenario. It always upsets me when biological parents want their babies back within the 1st 6 months and the adoptive parents fight it in courts. Unless the biological parents are unfit, they end up in court for years and, so far, custody has been rewarded to the biological parents in most cases. By then, the child has bonded to the adoptive parents who have made it more traumatic. There was a recent story where the biological parents were emigrees from China and claimed they did not understand that they had given up their daughter for adoption - they had even visited regularly. When they realized at age 6 months that the adoptive parents were keeping their daughter, they tried to get her back. From that point on, the adoptive parents banned them from seeing the girl and fought in the courts for over 8 years. Custody of the girl was given back to the biological parents. In this particular case, it seems shameful that the adoptive parents didn't let the little girl go when it started since her biological parents had visited for as long as they were allowed and did not show signs of being bad parents.
Larry Birkhead came forward long before Anna's death; so I tend to view his claims with the least amount of distrust. However, I think that the courts should appoint neutral trustees to be financial custodians for her trust fund. It would be the best way to safeguard her interests.
Larry Birkhead came forward long before Anna's death; so I tend to view his claims with the least amount of distrust. However, I think that the courts should appoint neutral trustees to be financial custodians for her trust fund. It would be the best way to safeguard her interests.
AGREE! with gwendolyn and heyang! i AM tired of all-anna-nicole-all-the-time on tv...but in my gut i want a dna test done ...and i feel stongly that howardkstern is NOT the father...and knows it! and, sadly, i think anna nicole knew it too. it is outrageous to me that this baby is almost 6 months old and there has been no attempt to identify her true biological father. larry birkhead seems to be one of the few people in anna nicole's life who tried to get her off drugs. i just hope all of this bs and hiding is over soon, for the sake of the baby. and then if someone could step in and save britney! her eyes look so dead in the shaved head picture...it's so scary...
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2004
Chineese baby story is a bit more complicated, Heyang. The baby was never adopted, she was put in foster care when her father lost the teaching assistanship, and thus, his leagal reasons to stay in this country. Parents put the baby into the foster care, thinking the situation would resolve itself soon, and at the same time, the foster family moved in to adopt the baby.
real tradegy is that this legal battle went on for 5 years or so. it should've been solved right away by giving the baby to her biological parents, who have been trying to get her back all along. Now you have an American baby who doesn't speak Mandarin moving to China, while leaving behind the only family she new. A horrible case.
real tradegy is that this legal battle went on for 5 years or so. it should've been solved right away by giving the baby to her biological parents, who have been trying to get her back all along. Now you have an American baby who doesn't speak Mandarin moving to China, while leaving behind the only family she new. A horrible case.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
Thanks for sketching in the details. I really just remembered the key points that the biological parents did not fully understand what was happening at the time and that they apparently did not intend to give up their daughter since they continued to visit. In this case, the foster parents and the courts did not act in the best interests of the child IMO.
Obviously, if the biological parents totally abandon the child for several months/years, I don't feel that the child should be returned to them if they are in a stable home environment. I do feel that if/when the child is old enough they should have the option of meeting with their biological parents.
These cases have gotten a lot more complicated, especially since the courts now recognize the paternal rights. Open adoptions have also had pitfalls.
Obviously, if the biological parents totally abandon the child for several months/years, I don't feel that the child should be returned to them if they are in a stable home environment. I do feel that if/when the child is old enough they should have the option of meeting with their biological parents.
These cases have gotten a lot more complicated, especially since the courts now recognize the paternal rights. Open adoptions have also had pitfalls.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
I think Ana had a fun filled life till life became serious for her. I also think that DNA is conclusive, and I believe in paternal rights as well as supporting a baby after divorce.
Joe
Joe
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2003
I am torn between Birkhead and Stern. It takes more than DNA to be a father IMO. It seems that for whatever reason Anna did not want Birkhead in her child's life and did want Stern. I think that should matter more than DNA. She also made it clear that she did not want her Mother around the baby. As for where she is buried, it would be cruel to bury her anywhere other than beside Daniel.
BTW does anyone else notice how much Birkhead and Anna look alike......I think it is the cheekbone stucture?
BTW does anyone else notice how much Birkhead and Anna look alike......I think it is the cheekbone stucture?
Similar threads
