fracas

In my “real” life, everyone knows me to be probably the least “celebrity struck” person they know. I really don’t think being a celebrity or having money makes anyone more important or better than the next person.

I’m quite positive for example, that the President has occasion to suffer from gas and that his farts stink like anyone else’s. I’m also sure that Celine Dion’s pits would stink if she forgot her deoderant one day; that Prince Charles has morning breath like the rest of us and that Prime Minister Stephen Harper (or name another if you choose, it’s all the same to me) has toe jam if he doesn’t take care of his feet right.

The point is, one’s fame or size of their bank account does not make them exempt to the same maladies and bodily inconveniences and/or frailties and imperfections as the “average joe”.

So why then, some of you might be wondering, do I even bother to post about Anna Nicole Smith and the mess that has taken over the news and every other conceivable form of media as if it were as important as 9-11?

It’s about the baby.

The real issue in the whole Anna Nicole Smith mess, is whether or not baby Dannielynn is cared for properly and has a chance at a better life.

And make no mistake, by “better”, I mean more normal, not wealthier.

In the light of reports such as the one where Anna’s former nanny filed an afidavit back in December of 2006, alleging that Anna underfed Dannielynn because “She wanted her baby to be ’sexy’.”, those in the position to do something about it need to be more concerned that this baby ends up with someone who cares about her, than they are concerned about doing as “Anna wanted”. Perhaps it’s poor form to talk ill of a dead woman, but perhaps Anna herself, wasn’t capable of being a good mom to Dannielynn at the time? It doesn’t mean she didn’t love her, but love isn’t always enough. If Anna was too far into drugs and other negative lifestyles to really provide a stable home for her child, perhaps she (despite being a celebrity) should have been forced to change her life in order to keep her own child?

It happens to “regular people” all the time.

It’s not just about claims made by a nanny. The video showing a very pregnant Anna painted like a clown, talking to a doll in a stroller as if the doll were real, gives a glimpse into Anna’s reality. She is clearly, stoned. Stern jokes with her about whether it’s a “mushroom trip”, and audible is his laughter. He then comments, “This footage is worth money.”

So we know that Anna used drugs during her pregnancy and we know that her professed “partner” Stern, not only condoned it but enabled it, photographed it and intended to profit from it.

It is doubtful, as to whether Anna had the presence of mind to properly care for her baby, to make decisions for her baby or to decide who else is appropriate and worthy enough to have the right to care for or make decisions on behalf of her baby.

Yet Stern would like for the world to think it should be him.

We know that Stern has been alleged by several other parties, to be “controlling”. While much of what Larry Birkhead and Virgie Arthur have to say is their opinion only, unsubstantiated in some cases, we do have the video of him taping a stoned Anna. We do also have the testimony of Ford Shelley to consider.

“Shelley, son-in-law of South Carolina real estate mogul G. Ben Thompson, accused Stern of not allowing him to pick up his own daughter from Anna Nicole Smith’s house on the day that the infamous Anna Nicole “Clown” video was taken. He also said that his child wasn’t allowed to call him to have herself picked up. Shelley angrily pointed to Howard K. Stern and seethed, “I’ll never forgive you for that.” “

Stern seems to have many control issues. He would only appear before Judge Seidlin if the Judge would agree to allow him to come and go as he pleased, he seemed to have control over Seidlin.

Birkhead has claimed that Stern was the cause of his and Anna’s relationship problems, and that Stern harassed him following his and Anna’s break-up, insisting that Birkhead deny paternity of the child.

We also know that Stern has so far, refused to provide DNA to prove Dannielynn is indeed his baby. All other serious claimants have agreed to do so. This smacks of control issues. If the baby is his and he is confident of it, why on earth would he not provide a sample so as to make this media circus end and allow for the baby to be able to resume a normal life with him? If he is concerned the baby might not be his, he is attempting to control a situation that is not his to control.

It seems pretty clear that what needs to happen, is that the judge who ends up presiding over the paternity case, needs to flat out order the DNA tests and get this over with. If Stern does end up being the father (which I doubt), it would behoove the appropriate child welfare agency to take on this case and make sure Dannielynn is raised properly. It happens every day to people in the non-celebrity world, (and it should if a child is not being treated right) there’s no reason celebrities should be able to mistreat their children and get away with it. Children have a right to a healthy (in every way) life where they can grow up as a child with their future in front of them, not as a meal ticket; children have a right not to be subjected to drugs in the womb so that the “footage will be worth money” and children have a right to not be exposed to drug use by the adults that are supposed to care for them

I have stumbled across a petition to the Bahamian Government, regarding Howard K. Stern. The petition was not created by me. If you would like to sign it, please visit here.