Do you think that if she was a regular citizen that she would be treated the same, or would they have placed her children in foster care?
2007-04-08 13:35:17 · 8 answers · asked by Caryn 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Celebrities
I believe that if she was not a well-known celebrity that, yes, her kids would have been taken away from her and her lifestyle investigated to see if she was capable of raising them. She's in and out of rehab, going out and doing strange things to get attention and if she didn't have her millions to hire nannies, she'd probably neglect her kids more than she already does. What mother with little kids goes out partying every night like that?
2007-04-08 13:41:38 · answer #1 · answered by Princess of the Realm 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Im not the greatest fan of Britney Spears but I must say in her defense not all is as it seems when you are getting your information from magazines and tv. She doesnt go out every night..... and other than having severe post natal depression, there isnt really anything that she has done to 'harm' her children. I think b4 they get taken off someone who has made a few mistakes or bad choices they should look at parents that are on drugs or physically, mentally or emotionally abusing their children. She has been investigated by child protection and they were left in her custody because she wasnt an unfit parent.
2007-04-08 20:51:39 · answer #2 · answered by sweetozzie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How many people out there are struggling everyday with ailments that are hard to get rid of. There are alot of parents out there who are alcoholics, drug addicts, sex addicts, food addicts, gamblers, etc... They don't lose their kids unless it is very extreme. I think she is only human and in general, leaves them at the very least, with a nanny. By doing so, she is exercising good judgement, at least they aren't alone. She is also lucky to have family nearby that care about her. So, yes she would still have custody either way. The only time they would take her kids away if she had ill intent and brought harm to the children themselves. (Last year when she was driving with one of them on her lap without a seatbelt. That was pretty stupid). All in all though, give her a break. She is doing the best she can with all that girl has had to deal with.
2007-04-08 20:49:11 · answer #3 · answered by daff73 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
She hasn't done anything any other mother hasn't done. Trip with babe in arms. Not buckle the baby up....hey we have all done that once in awhile. Her son falls from high chair. That is minor compared to some falls that are accidental.
They are being way too hard on her.
Sure she flipped out and had a few wild weekends.
It happens. Like all famiys grandma and dad were there to help with the kids.
Brit is human and she lives her lilfe in a fish bowl. Its gotta be so hard to do.
Cut her some slack
2007-04-09 01:08:41 · answer #4 · answered by clcalifornia 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
She would totally have had her kids taken away. Sorry but I think the only reason she still has them is BECAUSE she's a celebrity and she can have an eye kept on her at all times. I love her but I don't love her choices in men and family matters.
2007-04-08 20:54:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably go unnoticed unless someone called child protective services on her.
2007-04-08 20:39:34 · answer #6 · answered by Nick Name 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No,she would still have her children,because if she was not a celebrity,all her irresponislbe attitide would go unnoticed.
2007-04-09 06:42:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would they take her children? She hasn't done anything to harm them. She is a new mother and is learning like everyone else.
2007-04-08 20:38:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋