Michael Jackson's Kids 'Slowly Coping'

By PopEater Staff Posted Feb 15th 2010 08:22AM

Michael Jackson's three children, Prince Michael I, 12; Paris, 11; and Prince Michael II ("Blanket"), 7, have been trying to gain a sense of normalcy since their father's death in June. With the support of their grandmother and guardian Katherine Jackson, the children are "slowly coping."

One source tells PEOPLE that Prince and Paris have become more confident over the past several months. "It would have been hard to imagine them going out in public or showing up at someone's house hanging out and playing video games before [their father died]," says the source. "That had a lot to do with Michael, because every time he showed up there were bodyguards and [chaos]. And now, not so much. It feels much more normal and they've adjusted really well to that."

"They're doing great, thanks to the love and support they've gotten," Adam Streisand, an attorney for Katherine Jackson said.

Katherine is raising the kids with their former nanny, Grace Rwaramba, who had stopped working for Michael before his death but returned afterward upon Katherine's request. Sources reveal "nothing over-the-top happens" at home and she is trying to have the children live as normal a life as possible. And now when the children go out in public to karate lessons or to the library and church, their faces are no longer concealed. "They like not wearing the masks," the family source says of the trio. "It's a different experience for them."

"Katherine really listens to the kids," says Streisand. "She wants to give them a sense of freedom when she can. She wants to encourage them."

Their father's influence lives on though. "Talking to Prince is like talking to Michael," says the family source. "He's so smart and mature – way beyond his age." Paris, meanwhile, "wants to be a singer."

Tags: michael jackson, MichaelJackson

Comments

(138)

Monday 15 February

By shelly

Highest Rank Vote down Vote up Report this

Ah gee...maybe we could get weekly updates in a special PEOPLE section!! Just leave those children alone so they can at last have SOME semblance of a normal life.

By BillyJo

Vote down Vote up Report this

Exactly Shel. These frickin mags with their never ending need to invade private lives for the sake of the almighty dollar. These kids never asked to be shoved into the public's face and they don't deserve to be treated like their father enjoyed. He THRIVED on attention and publicity, no matter how much he may have protested in the past. It fed his huge ego. Now these kids have essentially been released from that glare of the cameras and should be left to grow up like any of their friends down the street. HANDS OFF and give them their space PEOPLE, US Weekly, National Enquirer, TMZ, etc etc etc.

By Diane

Low Ranked Vote down Vote up Report this

This is going to be a first, These Children are indeed fortunate to have had Michael as a "father". Imagine, being supported by the Jackson's for life and there is no way the Jackson's can stop it with out demonizing Michael.

By marie2009

Diane,Katherine and that family will do nothing but make sure his children are taken care of, for all they are his heirs. Irregardless of whether they are his biologically or not he loved those kids, they are Jacksons.

By Julia

Marie2009 - there is no such word as "irregardless". It's just "regardless". I'm just saying... :)

Tuesday 16 February

By Tell It Like It Is

BillyJo- King was HUMBLE in every sense of the word. Quiet spoken as per those who knew him. I don't think he thrived on publicity as much as media thrived on him. Was a recluse for over a decade. When resurfaced, media swarmed him as usual. King WANTED his children to lead normal lives. World LOVES him, why everyone so crazy about him. King's destiny,not his fault. Great, not ego.

Kevin- You can't get 1/4 of the women King could have. We love him so much. Will always yearn for him. In lieu of all, the fagg can only be you.

By Shauna

This is for Diane. I think that Mrs. Jackson and the rest of the Jackson family would not want to stop supporting his children, those are his children. I see that you put father in quotations, so I am assuming you are implying that they are not biologically his? Well that is a moot point, because irregardless of whether they have Jackson DNA or not, those children are his kids. If you are implying because they may be white that his family would not want to take care of them? I think that would only hold true if the races were reveresed, meaning if the Jacksons were white and the kids black, then they would probably be thrown out. Don't ya think? Mrs Jackson loves those children because her son did and those are her grandchildren. Biologically or not. So with that said, I do not think that the Jacksons see those children as anything but Jacksons. Plain and simple.

By Patty

I total agree with your statement. Just because his children are adopted doesn't mean he didn't love them with all his heart. They are his children.

By pam wilis

amen 100%

By Mary Ann

High Rank Vote down Vote up Report this

I believe if the situation were reversed, it would still be the same. Families love their adopted, step or surrogate children as much as their dna kids; they would certainly keep the children, either black or white.

Wednesday 07 July

By hope

correction the children were born within a marriage, legally and emotionally there are MJ kids, adoption should not be used here..

By Mark

Lowest Rank Vote down Vote up Report this

Those kids are better off without that freak. They have his money and they can grow up semi-normally without having to grow up in his insane fairy-tale/ playground world, 365 days a year. Maybe he molested boys, maybe he didn't but he is guilty of dangling a baby out of a window and being a liar. Anyone who dangles a baby out of a window isn't fit to be a parent. PERIOD.
and honestly he was great during a time period. I think his singing and dancing are dated and overrated. In his time, he was great but his talent and fame diminished and past.
He wasn't a "King" He was a has-been.
As far as I'm concerned, while Dr. Murray isn't entirely without fault, he didn't KILL Michael Jackson. Michael jackson KILLED Michael Jackson.

By victoria

U R A JACKASS WITH NO RESPECT.

By BRETT

i agree at least 100%!!! elvis was truly great, but even he started losing it in 1972. by 1975, he started going down hill FAST. if you like elvis, michael, janis joplin,, kurt kobain, or whomever, it is a shame that they are involved in drugs.

By Angela

Don't get on your ridiculous rant about things you truly know nothing about.You have no idea about the workings of Michael or his childrens lives.If you have nothing positive to put out there then keep it to yourself.Its about love L.O.V.E.Rest in Peace MICHAEL.Its about time...You deserve it.

By ie

Mark is 100% correct. Except for the part about maybe molesting children. Of course he molested children... You dont pay off if you have nothing to hide....

Tuesday 02 March

By Chernobelle

oops Mark U are the freaky one , and I guess the real wacko is U

By Debbie

Mark.... I think you might change your mind if a doctor did something to cause someone you loved to loose there life. Doctors take the oath to heal people not harm them or help them harm themselves.

By DivaTalk

Mark, your parents named you after a disciple of Jesus Christ. Learn something from your name, and ask Him to heal your rage.

Page 1 of 7