semisquare said:
albert dosent have bodyguard for no reason and if this is his child. that child would need the same protection. so the mom did her child a great disservice by going to the press. because albert would need to provide protection for the child which would best happen in his father's custody. so the mom would loose out on both fronts, one she dosen't have an attachment to albert anymore and second any money she would have gotten by keeping her mouth shut would also be gone
How do you know Albert doesn't have a body guard or didn't have one at any point in time? Stephanie has had had bodyguards and the only reason you hear about them is because Stephanie has romantic relationships with them.
You don't take a child from a mother because the father has more money. (It cost money for security) He can provide security for the child whether or not he has custody. That seems to be what is implied here.
The press may have caught wind of this story and threatened to print it with or with out her two consent. She may have felt the need to explain herself somewhat. The tabloids do that alot. ie. Star Enquirer... Albert may have even known the story was going to hit.
Quote[If the child is Albert's he would be the best provider for the child since the mother went public based on safety which if his I have no doubt he did talk to her about the dangers to the child of revealing paternity]Quote
If Albert knew this child was his he should have provided some sort of security from the start. In that sense he did not provide, so that does not make him the best provider....Actually chances are he has provided barely anthing for this child, maybe a couple of bucks here or there but no fatherly emotional support. How could he? He's a very busy guy with a Principality to run if he had custody how often would the child be in the care of a nanny while he's flying about? The child could be in the care of his mother which is better than a nanny. No acknowledgement even public acknowledgement from a father can have a devestating and lasting effect on a child. The mother no doubt is probably worried about this. Believe it or not not everything is about money.
It must be very hard to have a child alone and then hide the paternity from everyone, no doubt including her family. How long could she play that game for before it tore on her family & friend relations? It's like saying "hide my child I am ashamed" That's no good either.
I would also like to say that Albert has probably done the best that he can in this situation. Maybe he did provide something from the start, that people are unaware of... He is in a very tough position, and at some point he must of been afraid of the consequences to their actions. I hate to say this but I think that Rainer changed the succession laws for a reason. - (the law about adopting an heir) I don't think that Rainer wanted little Alexandre in line for the reason that Albert was not wed to the mother. That may have played a large roll in the acknowledgement of the child. I think Rainer was very well aware of Alexandre; nothing much got past him! This is all speculation of course.
Quote [Silence also isn't an admission of paternity its a wise legal decision] Quote
Very true, I could be rambling for no reason!
