Sunday, January 07, 2007

Kevin's time with his sons at Britney's residence

There seems to be some confusion around Kevin's time from 12-4 PM M, W, F with his sons, and why it is happening at Britney's residence. Here's what the document says:

In consideration of the Respondent's (Kevin) agreement to Petitioner's (Britney) request that he visit with the children at the Petitioner's home, Petitioner shall use her best efforts to ensure that no third party visiting the house interferes with Respondent's custodial time with the children. Respondent has requested that Petitioner specifically agree that the persons to be at the home during Respondent's custodial times shall be limited to Petitioner, the children's nanny, Petitioner's assistant and other regular household staff. No agreement has been reached by the parties in this regard.

So basically Kevin has agreed to Britney's request that for January he will spend time with the kids at Britney's home and because of that Kevin wants to make sure there's not going to be a lot of people around during those times. I've heard speculation that Kevin needs to supervised - this is not the case.

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's amazing how much debate takes place without people simply reading the document.

Anonymous said...

^ yeah true. Like how people were accusing Britney of keeping JJ and SP away from their half siblings. Then whining how poor Kevin couldn't take the kids out of the house to meet the rest of the family. When it was Kevin's idea.....

Anonymous said...

So basically Britney offered to give him time with the boys. He accepted but requested that only Britney and some of the employees be present. Britney hasn't accepted the request, but has said she will do her best to ensure that no one distrubs Kevin's time with the boys.

Sounds civil enough for me.

Anonymous said...

Britney's afraid that if the babies are left unsupervised, they'll end up with pierced ears and "F" tattoos on their forearms.

Anonymous said...

It wasn't Kevin's idea that the visits take place there, but he's agreed to Britney's request for now under some conditions.

Anonymous said...

Alison I wouldn't bother posting anymore about it, people are going to twist things around no matter what. Thanks for the info though.

Anonymous said...

He is not obligated to have supervision, just that she has the option of not leaving the kids alone with him. Otherwise, the decree would clearly state that no parties shall BE present nor interfer/interact/infringe on Kevin's time.

This decree says the Spears and her household people can clearly be with/interact with the boys on Kevin's time....which I think is where some people are getting the "supervised" from. She essentially doesn't have to "leave them" with Kevin at all.

The decree also states that Spears has not wholly agreed to his terms as far as who can be present and what not...so I guess we shall see/

Anonymous said...

The request was made by Britney, not Kevin, she ask Kevin to visit with the kids at her home during the month of January and in return Kevin ask that their be NO third party present at the home while he's spending time with his kids, if you notice he said nobody other than the nanny, her assistant, and the house-keeper be there and she (Britney) if she wants.

Neither the nanny, assistant, nor the house-keeper can say or do anything to interfer with Kevin's time with the children, unless he ask for their assistant, he's NOT being supervised.

If he was being supervised the court would have appointed somebody to do the supervision.

It must have been a resaon why Kevin agreed to Britney's request to only visit with the kids at her home for the month of January, that reason is not stated in the court papers which I think is wise, the less the public knows the better for a civil relationship between Kevin and Britney and better for the kids in the end.

Kevin didn't have to agree to go to her home to be with the kids, he could have said no and take the kids to his home, but he agreed to her request, that shows descency and respect for whatever her reason is for asking.

I applaud Kevin on this, ppl wants to make him out to be a bad guy without actually knowing him.
I hope the custody thing will get resolve soon, I like the idea of Kevin and all the kids (Kori, Sean, Kaleb and Jayden) spending time together.

Kelly.

Anonymous said...

Kevin didn't have to agree to go to her home to be with the kids, he could have said no and take the kids to his home, but he agreed to her request, that shows descency and respect for whatever her reason is for asking.

Get off Kevin's balls for one second and think why she might have wanted the kids to stay in her house.

He could have said no, and she could have said no to allowing him to see the children at all. I believe it was both of them compromising. Obviously Kevin has never been the sole care taker of those children. Britney I'm sure felt it was not right for them to be away from her and their nanny.

Just don't act like Kevin did such a wonderful thing by agreeing to see the kids at Britney's house. If you didn't notice Britney obviously has the upper hand in the custody battle right now. I doubt Kevin had much of a choice.

Anonymous said...

^ Because it appears that the children are with Britney 97.5% of the time, it makes since that she has more say and "right" to make requests upon Kevin as to where he can see the children. She, from almost every account, has primary care of the boys since day one...so of course, wherever she is...it would be the likely place to see the children.

The supervision thing gets me as I understand in most cases where parents have agreed to a set time/days thing. Each parent gets to spend their time independantly...meaning neither has the other parent/their people around when they are trying to spend their time with the child.

The "supervised" part probably comes from the fact that he agreed that Britney/her people don't have to leave him by himself with the children. Essentially hinting that it is "supervised" or could be by any of those people because he cannot ask them to leave (it says they legally can be present at anytime). Those people cannot interfer or not allow Kevin his time, but as it is Britney's house, he must follow her house rules.

Anonymous said...

^Kevin has a big part in the life of his boys right now until the court make a decision or both him and Britney reach some kind of agreeement.

He didn't have to agree to go to her home at all, in visitation the courts would have allowed him to take the kids to his home, and I read an interveiw where a friend of Kev said he visited Kevin and Sean was there.

As for supervised visit he would still be able to take the kids, the court would have assigned a social-worker to follow him around or take them to his home and stay for the duration of the visit, unless there is evidence that Kevin has or would harm the boys he wouldn't need to be supervised.

Read the document, Kevin as the upper hand here right now, he can state who should/shouldn't be there and he could have said no to her taking them to Miami, but he decided on a more smoother way of dealing with it all, cause if he had said no then she would have to filed a petition with the courts which would have taken longer and make things nasty, and if she had taken them without his agreeing she could have been charge with kidnapping them, cause things got messing when she decided to file for sole custody and he counter sued.

When he agree to go to her home he took a big step in the right direction, it showed that he's willing to compromise and work with her, that's why I said he did a good thing.

Kelly.

Anonymous said...

^Kevin has a big part in the life of his boys right now until the court make a decision or both him and Britney reach some kind of agreeement.

He didn't have to agree to go to her home at all, in visitation the courts would have allowed him to take the kids to his home, and I read an interveiw where a friend of Kev said he visited Kevin and Sean was there.

As for supervised visit he would still be able to take the kids, the court would have assigned a social-worker to follow him around or take them to his home and stay for the duration of the visit, unless there is evidence that Kevin has or would harm the boys he wouldn't need to be supervised.

Read the document, Kevin as the upper hand here right now, he can state who should/shouldn't be there and he could have said no to her taking them to Miami, but he decided on a more smoother way of dealing with it all, cause if he had said no then she would have to filed a petition with the courts which would have taken longer and make things nasty, and if she had taken them without his agreeing she could have been charge with kidnapping them, cause things got messing when she decided to file for sole custody and he counter sued.

When he agree to go to her home he took a big step in the right direction, it showed that he's willing to compromise and work with her, that's why I said he did a good thing.

Kelly.

Anonymous said...

Neither really has an upperhand to be honest. They have to be civil or the other will just counter. And really why would Kevin want to fight Britney on visiting the boys? How would that look if she gives hin the greenlight and then he makes a scene about it. It would have just lead to more issues.

I am glad they have agreed to this arrangment for now.

Anonymous said...

My questions is, is that why doesn't kevin get those kids now? He plans to throw some serious allegations at britney. Like doing drugs and drinking while she was pregnant. And he says that she is very unfit. Like i said those are very serious allegations. I wouldn't wait till the court date to air those things out in an attempt to get those kids. I would be trying to get those kids RIGHT now. I guess those rumors about that are false or it shows that he saying that to get some money out of her.

Anonymous said...

^Can't forget the video he plans to use. He plans to show the courts how out of her mind she is. She is so on drugs and binge drinks and she is so out of her mind that he let's her a the bulk of the custody right now,lol.

Anonymous said...

^^ Ummm...people! The actual decree states that Spears would try her best to have third parties not be present...but it goes on to then say that Kevin REQUESTED that only certain people be present. To which Spears replied with...IT has yet to be resolved! Meaning she hasn't agreed to that stipulation yet!!! As they haven't come to an agreement as to who can be present doing the visits.

Not all courts allow visitation at the other parents' house...especially if the children spend the majority of their time with the other parent.

In supervised visits, not every case is the same. The court does not always appoint an advocate to oversee the visitation. Sometimes the parents come up with a mutual person that oversees the visitations. Sometimes it is a grnadparent, sometimes a family friend...it all depends! The only time the court appoints someone, which they HATE being involved in custody cases, is when one parent has documented problems and issues.


And it is not kidnapping, as she is the biological parent and the primary caretaker at that! If at most, it would be contempt of court b/c she would be violating a court order. Spears, technically can take them out of state without telling him if it does not interfer with his scheduled visits. She only had to get his "permission" now b/c they agreed to the set days, which would have interrupted his 3 days...as she will be gone a week.

Although neither appear to have the "upper hand" if it were going to be argued...Spears appears to have it as she has physical custody of the boys. They do not have to leave her care, even when Kevin is present. And given, that Kevin sees the boys 12 hours out of every week...

Lets just put it down to the fact that both seem to be, for all intent and purposes, trying to work on it. Which is what is most important!!

Anonymous said...

All the rumors about blackmail, videos, books, accusations from Kevin are just that - rumors. I seriously doubt there's anything to them.

Anonymous said...

Read the document, Kevin as the upper hand here right now, he can state who should/shouldn't be there and he could have said no to her taking them to Miami, but he decided on a more smoother way of dealing with it all, cause if he had said no then she would have to filed a petition with the courts which would have taken longer and make things nasty, and if she had taken them without his agreeing she could have been charge with kidnapping them, cause things got messing when she decided to file for sole custody and he counter sued.

Get a clue please. She only had to get permission because it was during his scheduled visits. How does he have the upper hand when they LIVE with her? He sees them 3 hours M,W, and F. She still has sole PHYSICAL custody. He can not in any way take the kids out of HER house.

She would not have been charged with kidnapping her own children considering she is primary caretaker and has ALWAYS been primary caretaker.

They are working together and I can't see why Kevin fans try to make it something nasty.

Anonymous said...

My questions is, is that why doesn't kevin get those kids now?

Don't believe that crap. If it were true Kevin is a total idiot AND a horrible parent for leaving the two boys in Britney's care while he went around the country trying to promote his cd. Please don't say he had to work. Because if his kids were in danger as these rumors state he is as bad as she is for ignoring it.

Besides he could have filed for emergency custody long ago if he believed the kids were in danger. Obviously they aren't.

Anonymous said...

The only reason that Kevin's time is at Britney's house for January is that Britney requested it and Kevin agreed. It's still his legal time.

It was probably agreed to because of practical reasons. Jayden's picture hasn't been released yet so they'd be all over Kevin every time he took Jayden out. And the kids have been through enough changes lately, it might be easier for them to adjust to one new house instead of two for now.

So Kevin agreed, for now. I think people are reading way to much into it. It's still Kevin's legal time.

Anonymous said...

We'll see after Jan, but I can't imagine him taking the kids for any extended amount of time. He has never been the caretaker of the kids and until they get older he has no reason to really see them beyond visitation. It's not he wants to raise them. He's not raising his first kids.

It's Kevin's legal time, but it still only 12 hours a week.

Anonymous said...

I can't imagine him not taking them out for extended periods at some point in the future. He's been taking Kori and Kaleb out on a regular basis, usually to the house before the divorce so they could hang out with SP and JJ. And since the divorce he's been taking Kori and Kaleb out as well.

There's a whole family of people on Kevin's side that will want to spend time with the kids, I can't see this arrangement for January lasting long term.

Anonymous said...

When has he taken his older kids out except for photo ops at Disney World? Kevin admitted he doesn't get to see his kids that often. Those kids are also much older and not the children of Britney Spears. He won't be taking Britney's kids out anywhere for a while, if at all. Maybe in a few years. But again, he doesn't take his older kids out much, if at all.

Anonymous said...

When he said he wasn't getting to see his kids as much as he liked it was because he was in the middle of heavy promotion for his album - a short term thing. Shar said he saw Kori and Kaleb about 3 or 4 times a month and that he had to respect Britney's boundaries. Kevin also said he talked to Kori and Kaleb "all the time" in one of his interviews just after his album was released.

Anonymous said...

Yes that's the crap story about Britney keeping Kevin away from his other kids. 3 or 4 times a month is sad and pathetic for a father to see his kids. Instead of going to Vegas he could have gone to see his kids.

Anonymous said...

If it is true and he only saw them 3 or 4 times a MONTH, then that was all on him. Like Britney would forbid Kevin from seeing his children, and if she did then he was an dumbass for allowin her too. He should have told her to go to hell and put his foot down. Childen aren't things you can just disregard. Be a man and see your kids.

I am calling BS in that story.

Anonymous said...

Someppl come on here and write nonsense about Britney always being the sole caregiver of Sean and Jayden, and you know this how? just because you've seen pics of Britney and Sean out and about, guess what Britney and Kevin where married, lived under the same roof with the kids, so my guess is Kevin was as much involve with the kids as Britney was.

Kevin himself has said that he doesn't like having a bunch of paparraizzi around taking pics when he's spending time with his kids, that one pic of Kevin and Kori at disney world I see as a way for him to get the paparrazzi to leave them alone, that seem to be the reason he pose for it and only with Kori.

Kevin and Britney agree that for the month of January Kevin will visit with the kids at her home, on certain days and at a particular time, whatever the reason, they are the only ones that know, Kevin filed for sole custody of the kids so I highly doubt he would settle for long with this kind of arrangement, I don't think he would agree to anything that would limit his time with the kids too much with all the family member he has, plus his other two kids.

The way I see it, Kevin as a good chance of getting joint-custody of the kids, A judge won't use Kevin's partying behavior to prevent him from being as involve in the kids life as Britney, if you notice Britney is an even wilder partier than Kevin, so ppl who are saying that Kevin partys in Vegas and all that crap, needs to take a look at the last few month, at Britney's wild partying, and think about what a judge would think about how involve Britney is with the kids.

By the way, when parents are involve in a custody suit, neither is allowed to leave the state/country with said child/children, without the other parent consent or a judge giving permission.

A judge haven't ruled, so neither really has sole custody, the kids live with her, yes, the court usually allow the kids to live with the parent that filed for custody first or the parent they've been living with, and since Kevin and Britney lived together and Britney filed for custody first the kids will live with her until a ruling is made, the judge can rule either way as to who should get custody, but it seem Kevin/Britney/their attroneys are trying to settle things without involving the courts.

My thought is an agreement have already been reach in the custody of the kids and that's why Britney ask Kevin that for this month of January he visit the kids at her home, maybe her reason has something to do with Jayden's pics not been released, nobody knows but them, but for some reason I think custody is already settled, because if you notice Britney made the request not Kevin, which leads me to believe they/their attroneys have worked out and settled on an agreement.

3-4 times a month, but do any of you know how long the kids were with Kevin on each visit? maybe they spend a day, maybe a weekend, or a week, nobody knows, so please stop pasting judgement.
Kelly.

Anonymous said...

^People are saying she has physical custody b/c the children are with her always (even Kevin has admitted this!) It also does not help his case for sole custody that he agreed to this arrangement in the first place b/c it still gives Britney sole physical custody for a time.

Just to clarify what you've said, unless there is a state law, which TX is the only known state to have the law, where one parent has to get the written consent of the other parent to take the child out of state. It does not matter whether there is a custody suit or not. Had that been an issue in this case, a motion to prevent/restrict movement would have been issued from the get go...which it wasn't. Niether has to get anything signed by the judge in order for the children to be taken out of state/country. The only time a judge has to "approve" such actions is when one parent is contesting such action.

In family court/custody issues, everything is looked at, but the major influence stems from whom has primary caretaking duties (which agian, Kevin already said previously that Spears has it b/c he was off doing other things.) Both their behaviors will be called in to question, but one question that Kevin will likely not be able to answer is why didn't he spend a significant amount of time with either boys since their birth (Agian, he was working, focusing on other stuff) but his going out with friends to Vegas when the boys were just born doesn't look good!

They most likely have reached some sort of an agreement. I am not certain how often he will get to see the kids b/c if this intitial decree is any indication, he didn't ask/argue for much. And the majority of the time the initial decree is just extended, if it proves to work for the time being.

3-4 times a MONTH, regardless of how long the visits were is not acceptable unless you live clear across the state and have limited visitation rights!! He lives/d 20 minutes tops from the kids, yet only saw them not even a handful of times a month? Most divorced/no longer together couples that have children and live in the same vicinity of one another share time and duties. #-4 times a month regardless of how you split it doesn't seem very involved and likely won't to a family court judge either...especially given the fact that he is/was within driving distance and had the means to see them more often.

Anonymous said...

^first of all Kevin said when he's working he doesn't get to spend much time with the kids much, alot of parents work, that doesn't mean he doesn't take care of them when he's home with them, what anyone see is what's in the media nobody know what goes on behind close doors, if that was the case then Britney would be a awful mother, y'all say Kevin was out constantly with his friends and partying, well the way I see it Britney is no better, cause she have been out partying constantly also, so before you talk about Kevin's partying behavior, take a look at Britney's and you'll see hers is no better, she can say that they are being cared for by the nanny, well so can Kevin.

Kevin and Britney both have JOINT LEGAL CUSTODY. meaning:

>>>>Joint legal custody means that both parents share the right and responsibility to make decisions regarding the child's health, education and welfare.<<<<

Britney having physical custody only needs the children is living with her.

Second, you don't get it, Britney had to ask for the permission to prevent Kevin from going to court, cause that would only delay things and in the end they could rule in Kevin's favor, I'm sure her lawyers adviced her of that possible, think about it she up and leave LA without letting Kevin now, what do you think he would do, and the court would tell her to return to the state with the kids, her getting his permission is so all that can be avoided, I'm not saying it's a nice thing for him to do, but when a person feel like they are being played for a fool they're likely to do something to get back at the person, I live in the real world, I've seen it happen.

You said that Kevin said that Britney is/was the primary caregiver of the kids, (which I've never heard him say)I've heard Kevin said she's a good mother and all that stuff, but, the only time he said he's not around is when he's working, again, most parent/s work, a judge can't hold him working against him, as for the partying in Vegas, It was news that he had an appearance, which mean he was working, no judge is going to hold him out with his friend as a mean to say he's an unfit parent, if that be the case they would have to say britney is unfit also, cause she has been doing the same.

As for the decree, I think Kevin and Britney agreed on arrangement, which is apart of this decree, what's behind this particular 1 month agreement nobody know, and it can only be extended if Kevin agree to an extension.
No he didn't ask/argue for much, but again nobody knows what's the reason behind her asking and him agreeing.

and as for this probably going to remind as it is, I highly doubt Kevin or his lawyer would agree to such a term on a permanent basic, first of all Kevin as other kids and I don't think he would want 2 growing up here and the other 2 there, the way he talks about his kids, I think he would want them to spend sometime together,

and second, they've grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins and other relatives that I'm sure Kevin would want them to know and vice versa.

I think Kevin seeing Kori and Kaleb 3-4 times a month and talking to them regularly on the phone is amazing, no one knows how long the kids spend with their father when they do, he has to work and the go to school, that's not unheard of, especially when some father don't see or talk with their kids at all.

People like to hate on this guy and nobody really knows what kind of person he is, y'all read some the 'tabs' and you think you know him, ppl need to stop judging this man, there's nothing out there that Kevin did/does that say he's an unfit father.

Kelly.

Anonymous said...

Obviously there is no talking to Kelly or Alison since everything is positive about Kevin and Britney is a horrible person. Fact remains is Britney has always been the primary care giver and will remain the primary care giver. You are dreaming if you seriously think Kevin cares enough about raising those children to really want them full time.

Anonymous said...

Y'all think Kevin cares about his kids.He see them when he feels like it if it wasn't for brit he probably wouldn't seen his other to kids.Bisides if it wasn't about money he wouldn't have asked for 50 thousand dollar and if he gets that he wouldn't take the kids from her.You don't put a on Kids.Brovo what swell father.I swear he is a jerk and he will be forgotten in a month or so becuase the slowly have.He not cute phycially or his action.Have we forgotten all those Vegas nights and partying it up with other girls shortly after Sp and JJ was both born and during.He not a father he is sperm donor.He used her for money and didn't love her.

Anonymous said...

Well, if you all want to think that of Kevin go right ahead, it doesn't really matter what you think or even what I think, Kevin is the father of those kids and he deserves to be with them as much as Britney.

as for Kevin partying, y'all need to stop pointing fingers, Britney is no better, she's as much a partier as Kevin and alot more wild, but you people point fingers at Kevin's partying as a show of him been an unfit parent, well, guess what if he is, so is Britney.

Britney is not the primary cargiver of those boy, ask her or her people about them these days and they say they're at home with the nanny, how can a mother who parties constantly and always hanging out with a different man every week be the primary care giver of kids she don't ever spend time with, god only knows how offen she even get a glimpse of them, or even kiss them goodnight for that matter, that woman parties all night, which mean she's sleeping all day, so who is the care giver of those boys, now.

don't point fingers at Kevin when the same can be said for Britney, they both need to calm down and think about the kids, atleast I can see where Kevin seem to be cooling down, but that other one seem to think that her Larry can erase all her bullshit, then write on her site about not being 'perfect', nobody is fucking perfect, but when you continuously do the same shit time and again, it just make you look fucking irresponsible , she keep doing the same bullshit over and over, still y'all say she's the better parent, well, guess what, nobody can really say who the better parent is, (money don't make a parent) but these boys need time with both parents so whatever reasonable solution can be reach for the sake of the boys, the better, they didn't get to chose who their parents would be, so all that anyone can hope for is that the parents they have will love them enough to keep them safe and secure, and already act in their best interest.

Kelly.

Anonymous said...

Kelly understand that part but here the thing brit hasn't been out that much since her birthday she has followed through and u know what so what if she cut lose she need it after bein not hardly doing anything.She doesn't party all that much yeah november didn't look to good for her but she cleaning up her act.People handle problem differently especially when it comes to divorce.People need to see it from all points of views.For heaven sakes give her a break people.Kevin is putting a price on his kids that's ashame.

Anonymous said...

Nothing in Britney's behavior is anything new, her actions/behavior is just like it was in 2002/03 up to january '04, you said it's ok for her to let loose, I say nonsense, if she was thinking about those boys, her partying wouldn't have been so out of control, she needs to start thinking and taking responsiblities for her action, alot of people go through divorce, (sad, but true) and if she was thinking about the kids instead of herself she wouldn't have to write that letter about not being 'perfect'.

When she started with all the nonsense, I wrote on here that she's back to where she was 3-4 years ago, how can that be, she has two kids, they should be her main concern.

>>>'not doing anything'<<<
what's that suppose to mean she's a mother, it's not ok for Kevin to party, but it ok for her to, you said she stop, but that only happen after the media started questioning her behavior, and her responsible as a mother.

I was a fan of Britney's for years, I didn't like her partying, out of control behavior back 3-4 years ago, but I sticked with her, thinking it was just a thing she was going, it exculated to the Vegas wedding, or whatever that was, the past 2 years I started really liking her again, I believed she said that kids and family was what she wanted, but the past 3 months her actions told a completely different story, this girl don't know what she wants, kids and family, sure as hell isn't it.

But the kids are there and Kevin is their father and he has as much a right to them as her.

As for him putting a price on them, I don't know, I see nothing that confirm any of that.

Kelly.

Anonymous said...

That's becuase the this site hasn't put the lastest magazine issue up on the site.Go on one of Brit fan site and y'all see the new magazine headline.I wasn't saying Kevin shouldn't go out, but he left her and did lord knows what for the past two year all thiose trips to vegas and being seen with females.Brit went out a few time in November and Once in December and once in January and that was a job related.She hasn't went back into partying mode.U act like she shouldn't have know life outside of those kids.I truely think that he only acting like he's being good.I think that paps aren't really interested in what he does.Heck the only time he seen his twice and he showed up late to and left early.Heck he only been reported with Kory once.Say yeah he so devoted to his kids.

Anonymous said...

You are so full of shit Kelly. Britney should have been thinking about those boys? Why was Kevin in Vegas a week after JJ was born? Was HE thinking about those boys?

as for Kevin partying, y'all need to stop pointing fingers, Britney is no better, she's as much a partier as Kevin and alot more wild, but you people point fingers at Kevin's partying as a show of him been an unfit parent, well, guess what if he is, so is Britney.

2 years > 2 weeks. Britney made some stupid mistakes and was going through a bad time. BUT that does NOT negate what she had already done with the kids. She is no longer doing that at all.

Britney is not the primary cargiver of those boy, ask her or her people about them these days and they say they're at home with the nanny, how can a mother who parties constantly

She isn't partying constantly! She has not been out in "constantly" in at least a month. Even if she was, she was still the primary PARENT watching the boys. She spent a year watching Sean as well, staying home and being with him every day. Can you deny that? Even though Kevin said it, and even though you saw pictures of her constantly with him? Just because she fucked up for a while doesn't mean all the good things she did are thrown out.

Let's not even mention - WHERE IS KEVIN?

and always hanging out with a different man every week be the primary care giver of kids she don't ever spend time with, god only knows how offen she even get a glimpse of them, or even kiss them goodnight for that matter, that woman parties all night, which mean she's sleeping all day, so who is the care giver of those boys, now.

She went out with that JR guy once. She went on a boat trip with that other guy once. That is two dates.

She does NOT party all night. Where is Kevin in all this ? Where is his blame? Why isn't he watching the kids?

You are assuming these things out of hate for you. Why don't you WAIT and see what your beloved Kevin has to say? I doubt he's going to say anything too bad about her. He has always said what a good mother she was and always supported her.

Anonymous said...

Coming from someone who works in the system:

Britney has sole physical custody at the moment and for what appears since the boys were born. That in itself does not look good for Kevin. Yes, they have joint legal custody which means that he has the right to have a say in all the major decisions regarding the boys ie: what type of education, their belief system, discipline, healthcare, things of that nature. But, Spears maintains the day to day decisions that most affect the boys. In fact, I would very well argue that she maintains sole physical custody with joint legal making it possible that the father feel a part of the child’s life.

Second, what the hell are you talking about when you say that she was advised to the agreement to let Kevin know when she was taking the kids out of state? It wasn't a decision made by the courts, instead one that they both agreed on! Nothing in this decree was handed down by a judge otherwise you would see “as ordered.” The court most likely would not have sided with Kevin which is why he agreed to this arrangement. Yes, no respectable family court judge likes it when one parent takes the children out of state away from the other parent...but it is not like Kevin wouldn't have an idea where they were and for all intent and purposes she maintained custody up until this decree was signed and filed. Britney cannot legally take her children out of state NOW in between the days of M-F b/c that interrupts the specified times Kevin is entitled to. Before the decree, Britney could take her children wherever she pleased, whenever she pleased without anyone's permission...Not nice? Certainly! But it stands that until this arrangement was hashed out Spears had sole physical and legal custody AS KEVIN DID NOTHING TO PREVENT IT BEFOREHAND. There are many motions he could have filed from the time the divorce was on record, in regards to the children, whom they resided with, visitation, and limiting mobility….but he didn’t and still hasn’t. Instead, he agreed to the stated which was drafted by Britney and her team.

They have both partied! It is not illegal and does not make them unfit parents...but it won't look good that Kevin left his boys right after their birth to go hang out in Vegas...even if it was "work related" b/c the first question from the judge will be "Was it really necessary?"...which truth be told...NO! He did not have to go to Vegas! The thing that will hang him is that people in his camp have been making statements in regards to Britney's care of the children...and yet, neither his people nor him have done anything to rectify the situation and agreeing to have such limited contact with the boys when they are in the care of their alleged "unfit" mother....NOT a good sign for him.

Their other relationships will not be looked at unless it started/was the cause of the divorce or the people are not the greatest to have around small children. The partying, so long as it can be proven that the children were cared for during said times...will be frowned upon, but not penalized.

If reports about him "giving up" his children for money are in anyway remotely true...well then he will be in the dog house BIG time, in every way. It is against the law to "sell" your children...it's called prostituting a minor, as well as, extortion and blackmail. Which carries a penalty of jail time. Plus, most family court judges see those types of statements and actions as “not having the slightest interest in the well-being of the child. It’s intangible proof that the parents use the children as vindictive bartering pieces in divorce”…thus, the majority of judges would cut parental rights either temporarily or permanently, depending on each case and the severity of it…as well as refuse any requests the parent who made such demands makes. I’m NOT saying that that report is true because it very well could be false. It doesn’t look good that some of Kevin’s friends have made statements regarding money and the type of settlement he will receive though.

Anonymous said...

You ppl come on here and act as if Britney is so innocence in all this shit and Kevin is some kind of evil person that did some awful kind of devious stuff to her, fuck that.

I said that Kevin has as much right to the children as Britney does, and no judge in his right mind would say that Britney is a more fit parent for these kids than Kevin, for she's partying as much as Kevin did, at least Kevin cool down and got his act together after realizing he could lose his kids, she on the other hand thinks that her money and Larry can erase and clean up her stupidity.

>>>haven't been out partying<<<

really?
cause I was watching 'extra' earlier and they showed a video of her going out on the town, this girl don't give a shit, she cares only for herself and nobody else, and to think that I dislike Justin Timberlake for treating her like he did, I guess she's showing her true colors now.

>>>Britney made some stupid mistakes and was going through a bad time.<<<

Thing is she never learns from her 'stupid mistakes', always the same shit over and over.
'Bad time' only because she can't seem to think for herself, somebody don't tell her what to do, she's like a (?????) chasing it's shallow.

I did say that Kevin said she's a good mother and all, he has constantly said that, but just because Kevin is not photogragh with the children in public doesn't mean he doesn't care for them and spend time with them at home.
The way I see it Britney had everyone fool for a while, claiming she wanted kids and family, the only time she's seen out with Sean these days is so she can use him to get some positive PR, and I see alot more of those moment coming up in the future, especially when it comes time to releasing her album, so much for her giving a damn, Kevin never did that, not even with Kori and Kaleb.

JR, some guy at a New Years party and a dude on the boat, looking so much like 2003 with Fred Durst, the married backup dancer, Colin (whatever his name is) and the men that claim she had one night stand with them, (should I go on???) the thing is I gave her the benefit of the doubt then and I thought she would have grown up some these past couple of years, I mean she's a mother of 2 now, she could had said you know what fuck you Kevin, "I CAN".

Everybody was blaming Kevin, now she's her own little trainwreck, and she's doing it all on her own.

And by-the-way, I don't hate Britney, I'm just very disappointed that I supported her all this time, even when other fans were bashin her, I always supported her, and now I'm trying to figure out why, she's just the same as she was before and the last 2 years was a real 'punk'd' you time.

Kevin and Britney were living together, no judge is going to say that she was the sole caregiver, for a person that work in the system I would think you would know that (Shar can say she was the sole caregiver of the kids since they were born, for as was told her and Kevin only lived together for a short time) a judge can't say that Kevin didn't care for the children while at home.
Another thing how do you think he know Britney's mothering skills unless he had seen her in action, that means he would have to have had some kind of involvement in the kids life.

Please DO NOT spin my words around, I said that her lawyer most have adviced her on the possible that Kevin could file papers if she leave the state/country with the kids without telling him about it.

Britney has custody of the kids after filing for divorce and sole custody because she filed first, if Kevin had he would have the kids, you work in the system (you said)is that not so, I read about it, (I would love to heard if I got it wrong)I would type it from my book here but that would take too long so a next time I will looks it up and do so (I've work tonight).
also if the parents are trying to work things out amongst themself with their lawyers the court don't usually get involve unless an agreement have or cannot be reached, yes Kevin could have bring the court in, but I and you (working in the system as you say) know that getting the courts involve would only be stupid on his part and things would only get nasty, with a whole lot of prying in ones private life, it's good Kevin and Britney are trying to work things out privately, it's only if they can't come to some form of reasonable agreement that one or the other would get the family court involve, (please tell me if I'm wrong).

Alot of fathers and mothers go out to work after a child is born, even away, in other state or country, what judge would ask if he had to go work as long as the child/children wasn't in any danger and left to fend for themself, as far as anyone know the boys were home with their mother whom the father deemed capable of caring for them while he was away.

You read the tabloids and you said his friend say this and his friend say that, none of these friend have names as far as I can see, a tabloids story won't stand up in court, just imagine if it could neither mother nor father would get these boys, for there are alot of not so favorable stories out about both Kevin and Britney, for a person that work in the system, you sure do now a whole lot of nothing.

>>>The partying, so long as it can be proven that the children were cared for during said times...will be frowned upon, but not penalized.<<<

How contraditing is this statement here, first you said that Kevin goes out and party a little after they were born, but here you said that as long as the kids were being cared for, then...., c'mom make up your mind, Kevin went out with friends and the kids were with their mother, Britney went out with friends and the kids were with their nanny, not left with the pots and pans and dogs, were in no danger, no judge is going to say either are unfit parents.

I only commented on the partying nonsense because somebody talked about Kevin's partying and say he's an unfit parent, while Britney is doing the same and they say she's a better parent, why? because she has more money more fame, that won't stop up in court unless something is going down under the table.

Atleast we both agree on something, it's totally WRONG if he's asking for money to give up the kids, it's ALSO WRONG if it's true she's offering money to him to give up the kids.

You keep going back to what you read in the 'tabs' all the stories in the tabloid media is called 'hearsay' and a judge would not allow it in court, ppl need to stop believe so much of what they read in the 'tabs' these ppl offer no proof as to any of these stories being true, all they say is 'sources' 'friends of Kevin's' or 'friends of Britney's' said.

Some of the things I brought up regrading Britney from the 'tabs' is to show ppl here that not all things are true, and if they are going to believe tabloid stories of Kevin then they might as well believe them about Britney cause, they're just about the same.

Kelly

Anonymous said...

Kelly...

I can only go by what I hear as I am not involved in either of their lives…that being said from the looks of things I can count the number of times when they were together that Kevin was out and about (using pictures, which cannot be disputed) and the fact that Kevin clearly stated in multiple interviews (which I read cause I like the guy) that Britney has/had caretaking duties and to paraphrase what he said in regards to raising children…which was a big deal when it was printed…. “I believe in being involved, but for the most part leave it up to her.” That does not look or sound good, in and of itself! Spears can claim sole caretaking if she can prove that more than 85% of the time, she was the one who cared for the children. It is not just that they lived in the same house that qualifies them as caregivers. And, IF it is proven that for a period Kevin didn’t see his children, when they were still married, there blows the equal caregiver theory. Again, LIVING TOGETHER DOES NOT CONSTITUTE EQUAL CAREGIVERSHIP…for all we know…and by what he has stated, he only spent a little bit of time in the morning with the boys b/c he was working and then when he got home, he “crashed.” If it can be proven that he did not partake in a reasonable amount of duties and responsibilities as their father, he doesn’t maintain the caregiver title.

From what has been reported, he is basing it off of reports about her "behavior and such"…and just because he says something about her mothering skills it does not mean that he has to be around to have witnessed it! Many times in not so amicable divorces one parent pulls the “unfit” card, regardless of whether it is true or they have witnessed it…which is why it is investigated by DCFS. There is usually always some drama regarding custody in not so amicable divorces. Some attornies go so far as to advise their clients to say something of the sort because it "looks" better for their client.

Everything in Family Court is basically on a case to case basis. Who files for divorce first and thus custody (which is within the papers) has no impact on the actual custody. Custody is decided based on the best interests of the child. Now, that being said, if one spouse has done egregious things that led to the divorce, it's possible a judge would be swayed by that when considering custody. Just because one parent files for custody first, it doesn’t mean they are going to actually get it. It depends on where the children are currently residing, whom they have a secure relationship with, what is going on in the home, things of that nature. Usually, if the children have a good relationship with both parents, then yes, the one that files first gets temporary custody. But, say for the sake of argument b/c this is usually the case, the father files for custody of his child following divorce…if the child spent the majority of its life with its mother (and again, this depends on the case and the age of the child b/c typically children under the age of 5 are always placed in custody of their mother barring any neglect/abuse accusations and findings) with the father not being present for the majority of its life…he isn’t going to get temporary custody, even though he filed first. Typically you have to be in possession of the child as well as file for custody in order to get it.

I do agree that being able to work it out themselves and between their lawyers is the best way to go! Oh to wish that every case was able to do that, but alas, that will never happen!! Courts HATE to get involved as judges and the occasional jury (most divorces don’t make it to trials) are not invested in your lives…they can only go by what evidence is presented. Thus, mediation is usually a requirement up until the case goes to trial or before a judge (You choose in the event that no agreement can be reached whether you want a jury to decide or just a judge.)

The point I was making about him going of to Vegas, where some claimed he was “working” (which it doesn’t appear so as it was an anniversary party for the club…that hadn’t hired him to do anything)…was that a judge would likely ask since his child was born days before, “Was it really necessary?” in a sense to leave your days old child, whom you need to bond and form a viable relationship with…so that you could put in an appearance and gamble? There a pics of him gambling the night he got there and for the few days he was there. Which, again, would be a NO! It is different if the father or mother HAS to go out and do something like work, but not when you choose to do so (when you are essentially arguing that it is in the best interest of your children to be with you)!

Your right tabloids won’t hold up in court as it is speculation and hearsay unless the stories can be proven as true. The point I was trying to make was that with the deluge of basically the same stories coming out…there is bound to be a grain of truth in them (and it goes for both). And a few of Kevin’s friends have been named (I don’t particularly remember off of the top of my head, but maybe after I get home tomorrow I will look for the articles), which if Britney and her team can PROVE, even a slither of the extortion stories or that Kevin only had very limited contact with JJ while they were married…well, it won’t help his cause any! As there goes the “in the best interest of my children.” The same goes for Britney if Kevin can prove any of the claims he is said to be making!! That is all I was trying to point out. It all comes down to the burden of proving such things. Which for the record, I do not believe that either is trying to prove that the other is “unfit” as Kevin agreed to a very limiting custody decree which if he were making such claims would look negative.

Noone loses their children because of partying unless the behavior negatively impacts the child! If drugs, abuse, neglect was a product of the partying then yes, neither would get custody. BUT the court cannot decide to order an ROC arbitrarily without the proof that the parents are unfit and harmful to the child. AGIAN, the point I was making with Kevin going out days after his children were born and partying was that it shows that he in a sense put going out above spending time developing a relationship with his just born child! Which goes for intent of caregiving and emotional stability for the child! Partying in itself is not a bad thing, but when it looks as if you left your days old infant to go gamble in Vegas…not a good thing when you are arguing for sole custody!

It is wrong of both of them if either is offering money for the children! Although I must say I haven’t seen reports where it says she is offering money to him to give up his children….I’ve seen the she offered said amount to settle the divorce to prevent a long wait. It would be a very SAD thing if any of the negative reports about either of them can be proven and thus used against them. As I feel, disregarding cases of abuse, children deserve and often do better with both parents involved in their lives!

Anonymous said...

Yes, I've heard Kevin said numerous times that Britney is a great mother, but never have I heard him say she was the sole caregiver, and ofcourse with babies this young they would be spending more time with mom than dad especially if the mother breastfeeds.
Kevin going out and working and only able to spend time with the boys in the mornings, don't have anything to do with his parenting skills, if that was so a whole lot of children would be living with awful/unfit parents, for alot of parents work, whether it be the mother, the father or both, he spend time with the kids and that's good, Britney was home because she decided to take some time of if she didn't she would be back at work and the kids would be with the nanny (though, nothing is wrong with that).

You keep going back to the tabloid media stories, why?
I know a lot of lawyers have strategies that they use to make their clients happy, but it's up to each person to know where to draw the line, and the way I see it is Kevin and Britney is trying to work things out without involving the family court, that is where I applaud them.

I DID NOT say that the custody thing is final, I said that the kids are living with Britney because she filed for custody first and that's the way it usually is when both parent lived together, if they didn't then the kids would continue to live with the parent they were living with until an agreement/ruling is made.

After Jayden was born almost 1 month after, Kevin was in Vegas to attend a function, (they said he was working, promoting his album) whether or not that's true still don't have anything to do with his parenting skills, a mother or father can go out, how does that affect their parenting skill, the kids aren't left in any danger, and was in the care of responsible adults ( which includes the mother) I see no harm there and I highly doubt a judge would use something as trivial as that to say either parent is unfit.

I really could careless about the tabloid stories, and who is named in those stories, all I said is if one chooses to believe the stories of Kevin they should also believe the ones of Britney.

The same can be said about Britney, if the stories in the 'tabs' about her can be proven true then it also wouldn't look good for her either, there are really nasty stories in the 'tabs' about both Kevin and Britney and that's why I said if it was up to those stories neither parent would get the kids.

The tabloids are only trying to create a story, and anybody with common sense would see that after the recent agreement between Kevin and Britney.

I still don't agree with you saying that he cannot develop a bond with his kids because he left them for a couple of days, what about all the other times that he IS with them.

I think we have one common understanding that the kids need both parents.
I think the kids need to see and spend time with both parent, they also needs to develop a bond with their other brother and sister, grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins, they're not just Spears, they're also Federline, I don't think neither should lose custody, I'm all for 'pure' joint custody, where the kids spend time in both homes, and with each parent relatives.

Kelly.