Photo Credit: David Livingston/Getty Images
Add another crazy rumor onto the Michael Jackson sperm donor pile! Today, the British tabloid The Sun ran a story that claimed former child star Macaulay Culkin donated the seed that ultimately spawned Jackson's youngest son, Blanket. (Culkin's rep, of course, calls the story "preposterous.") Compare this latest claim to the one that surfaced a couple weeks ago, when Michael Jackson friend and another former child star Mark Lester publicly speculated that he is Paris Jackson's sperm donor. Meanwhile, US Weekly still maintains that Prince and Paris were actually fathered by Jackson's dermatologist, Arnold Klein.
Does any of this wild speculation really matter? Far from clearing up any questions about the Jackson kids' parentage, it suggests a bizarre scenario in which Michael Jackson collected untold numbers of sperm samples from his friends and business associates over the years. Because if anything seem believable now, it's that Jackson went around asking everybody he knew for some sperm… you know, just in case. Did he have a special freezer at Neverland for it all?
The frenzy over the Jackson kids sparks a debate, in our minds, about the role of biological ties when it comes to parenting. We all know instances when a biological parent isn't the best caretaker for a child. (Octomom, we're looking at you.) And many of us know instances when an adoptive parent or family caretaker creates a loving, stable environment for a child. The furor over the Jackson kids is an extreme, admittedly nutcase example of how the biological father or mother is something of a moot point—even if a DNA test proved that Macaulay Culkin or Mark Lester or some other child star were the real father of Paris, Prince, or Blanket, what purpose would it serve the children? How might this parade of sideline characters detract from the kids' sense of stability?