|
Post by smitten on Mar 14, 2015 10:27:28 GMT -4
I think the wording of that article is a little vague. It says she's "regained primary custody" and that she only sees them on weekends.
I know there are Greecies with more knowledge about this than me, but aren't there several different types of custody with nuances, including types of primary custody? I've heard joint custody referred to as a type of primary custody. She might have gone a few steps up in what she can do with them like be able to see them unsupervised and be involved in their legal, education and medical decisions.
I don't think it means she has primary physical custody of the boys at this point. Because that would be shocking.
|
|
|
Post by divasahm on Mar 14, 2015 12:29:09 GMT -4
Celerydunk, we may not see the kids any more than we have lately because of a new California law that prohibits the paps from taking pics of celebrity kids without express parental permission. Although, come to think of it, maybe we will...
|
|
|
Post by discoprincess on Mar 14, 2015 16:37:56 GMT -4
Celerydunk, we may not see the kids any more than we have lately because of a new California law that prohibits the paps from taking pics of celebrity kids without express parental permission. Really? Hooray! We don't really need to see infinite number of papped pics of celeb kids, right? Someone posted on Lipstick Alley posted that no wonder K-Fed got a job; his child support from Britney was reduced (so claims TMZ) due to the revision of the custody arrangement.
|
|
|
Post by Witchie on Mar 14, 2015 20:34:09 GMT -4
Heard on the radio Britney is being considered for next year's Super Bowl. But so is Taylor Swift. Take it with a grain of salt. Lord knows I did.
|
|
|
Post by bitca on Mar 15, 2015 0:59:44 GMT -4
I know there are Greecies with more knowledge about this than me, but aren't there several different types of custody with nuances, including types of primary custody? I've heard joint custody referred to as a type of primary custody. She might have gone a few steps up in what she can do with them like be able to see them unsupervised and be involved in their legal, education and medical decisions. There's basically primary and joint. Then they bust down into a few different areas - different states even have different ways they portion out custody. But primary always means primary. I think it was probably just written poorly. (Didn't she basically have NO custody? I mean, her parental rights weren't taken away, but all she could do was have supervised visits. I'm assuming what you have, that she's able to at least make some choices for/about the kids, and can see them unsupervised.)
|
|
|
Post by carrier76 on Mar 15, 2015 10:48:23 GMT -4
Heard on the radio Britney is being considered for next year's Super Bowl. But so is Taylor Swift. Take it with a grain of salt. Lord knows I did. BOTH PLEASE!!!!!!!!!! Sorry, that would be freakin' awesome.
|
|
Foo
Landed Gentry
Posts: 976
Mar 6, 2005 18:58:09 GMT -4
|
Post by Foo on Mar 18, 2015 16:48:09 GMT -4
A trainwreck! I would so watch.
|
|
|
Post by mochakitty on May 17, 2015 23:01:58 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Hamatron on May 17, 2015 23:08:56 GMT -4
Her makeup and hair look nice, but that dress is too much. Is that a dress with formal pants under a sheer beaded dress? Huh.
|
|
|
Post by beautifulanddamned on May 18, 2015 0:19:04 GMT -4
That dress is not a good look. She looked great during her performance, however. Fit and healthy and not at all dead-eyed. All you can really ask of Britney these days. That song is the worst, though. And the video? Sweet Jesus, Britney looks like Iggy's mother.
|
|