Friday, May 28, 2010

Gary Coleman's $1.3 million lawsuit against his parents

Sadly former child actor Gary Coleman passed away today, and he's a reminder of what can happen when greedy parents are allowed to run all over their famous children and their money.

Some famous children do fine, that's true. We hope and pray the Gosselin kids get through this. We hope and pray their money is being protected. But we have major doubts. Ron Howard, Melissa Gilbert did fine--and also had very supportive and grounded parents not interested in their money. Kate and Jon however have demonstrated time and time again they are very interested in every last cent. But what's most frightening for the Gosselin children is how similar their careers are being handled compared to the laundry list of child stars who did not do just fine and whose money was not managed just fine.

One of the more glaring facts is that for almost the entire series, the Gosselin children were not paid at all, according to TLC themselves. At a December 10, 2009 court hearing under oath, TLC's Edward Sabin admitted their contract does not and has never provided for any payment for the kids, and "It is true the parents are responsible for payment to the children." In other words, it was left up to the parents to give them their money--and history has shown when parents are in charge of money, bad things happen. While Kate claims she has saved some money, there has never been one shred of proof their parents ever saved a dime for them during this period, or if they did as Kate claims, exactly how much she decided was adequate to stock away for eight kids who have spent their childhood working. We know absolutely no details, other than Kate's blanket assurance she's put something aside for them. On their own web site for many years, the Gosselin parents even stated that there is no college fund for the children, that information the state has one for them is false. So assuming they are not lying, their trust fund for the children is only a recent development. We hope Kate has saved everything they deserve. But why is this number such a secret? Well, it's not our business how much Kate has saved for the kids. Except, TLC was found to have violated child labor laws consistently and repeatedly. When someone is thumbing their noses at the laws of their state, when children are the victims, it should be the public's obligation to see to it they not only become in compliance with the law, but make amends for the years they were not. The children cannot stand up for themselves when it comes to money they are owed--at least not until they are adults, as Gary Coleman did. The children are so young they probably don't even realize how much money they really should be getting--give a kid $100 bill at that age and they think they're rich. We doubt the Gosselin kids know just how rich they've made their parents. Until they become of age, only the public can insist they are fairly compensated and protected.
After problems with the PA Labor Dept., TLC now reportedly sets aside in trust just 15% of their salary for all the children. When you think about this in real numbers, it's really shocking. For every $100,000 the Gosselins help their parents rake in, they only get $15,000. Divided eight ways: that's only $1,875 per child. Let's say they manage to make a million dollars in one year. The kids would each only end up getting $18,750....or, an annual salary that is below the poverty line in the United States for a family of four. An annual salary that is also below most college tuitions these days--if all this is just to save for college. A salary that will certainly be below all college tuitions by the time the twins reach college age in 2018. No wonder they need to keep working so much--college can't possibly be paid for yet.
What's most shocking of all, perhaps, is that this 15% isn't even safe from greedy parents. According to Laurie Goldberg of TLC, Jon and Kate may dip into this 15% if they need to for the children's safety, education, welfare or health. Broad terms that can include almost anything. Why aren't the children allowed to dip into their parents' 85% cut instead?

Coleman had to drag his parents through the court system for four long years before he finally got back the $1.3 they stole from his money. In the meantime, his parents sued him for defamation and breach of contract. Breach of contract? He was a child! Children can't even be bound by contracts. These suits were shot down. His parents were ordered to pay back every cent they stole.

His parents then tried to appoint a conservator over Coleman's financial and health needs--in other words, tried to circumvent Coleman and have some cronie handle this all instead. A shady move at best. A conservator is usually reserved for those incapable of understanding proceedings and assisting their attorney and the court due to mental illness or impairment, or people so sick they are in a coma. Coleman had some health problems including kidney problems, but he was mentally and physically well able to handle himself. Coleman sued for malicious prosecution for the four years of hell his parents put him through as an adult--not to mention what they did to him when he was a child. Coleman ended up estranged from his parents. The Gosselin children are certainly learning that when you have a problem with someone, you should estrange them. We'll see what happens when they're of age.
Thankfully the Gosselin children are being paid now, sort of, if you consider a salary below the poverty line payment. But what about back pay for the 130+ episodes they made prior to December 10, 2009? And what about keeping 100% of their money? They can't keep all their money just because they're a child? But when they're 18, they can? Why is this acceptable or even logical? Shouldn't children be entitled to all their money even moreso than even adults, since they are just innocent children and really should be in school and being a child and not working? 15% is a start, but is no where near satisfactory compensation for their current and back work. Still waiting for financial justice for the eight.

75 sediments (sic) from readers:

just.me said...

Don't forget that the parents can dip into this pathetic fund for expenses related to education, medical, and goodness knows what else.

I think it would have been great if the courts said there are eight kids and two parents, let's divide it equally, 10% each, and the parents can't touch the children's money!

Administrator said...

Can you imagine the stink Kate would make if the law said, 15% to the parents to SPLIT, and the rest to the kids?

Haha.

just.me said...

Actually, I think 15% for the parents sounds like a very fair commission!

What ever happened with the boycott? I kept reading about it, then...nothing. Has anyone heard from Kelly?

TVsnark said...

Great post! You said everything I was thinking today. I'm curious to see what Paul Peterson will be writing about Gary.

Jodie Foster and Danica McKellar are other child stars who turned out fine. I like to point out the few. Oh, also Myam Bialic (Blossom) seems to have her act together too.

The other list is much longer, just saying . . .

TVsnark said...

I wanted to comment about the PEOPLE magazine thread. Schmecky, you had me laughing my ass off! Thank you. OF COURSE I knew you were joking. It was nice to have some levity in a situation that makes us all ill.

Administrator said...

Exacy TV Snark. Not every single parent is bad and steals their children's money and makes them work this much. But most of them have a conflict of interest....most cannot resist dipping into the fund, even if they have good intentions (I'll just use this to make the mortgage this month, I won't do it again! Or, I'll pay it back!) When the temptation is there in the form of a pile of money, even good people take it. Eve and the apple.

Child labor laws weren't created because every single parent to ever have a child in the biz is bad. They were created because many are. The argument that not ALL parents are bad is stupid and meaningless. Not all people murder, but murdering is still illegal.

Irene S said...

Can someone please explain to me Kate saying in People "She is working, they are playing" If you are at the same photo shoot doing the same thing why is it Kate is the worker & the kids aren't?
If you are being filmed why is Kate the worker the kids aren't?

Oh, it is just insane......

Great article Administrator...RIP Gary Coleman that childhood smile he had....Tv shows come and go but who didn't find themselves humming the theme song to Different Strokes?

MickeyMcKean said...

RIP Gary Coleman.

Anonymous said...

Since the court determined that he did NOT in fact need a conservator, he was mentally and physically able to handle himself. Yes, it's a fact! Ha-ha!

Steph said...

Irene, Kate has always said that the kids don't need or deserve to get paid because they aren't working...they are playing and being filmed. It's how she justifies her very expensive lifestyle of first class airfare to and from LA and such. It's all HER money.

With the calculations above...well, I am sure the kids' private school, medical expenses and the like will eat up a majority of the money. They won't have much at all when they turn 18. In fact, I can picture Kate telling them they have to take out student loans and work part time to pay for school themselves. That would be fine if she hadn't already sold them out...

just.me said...

I have such a difficult time attempting to understand Kart's fans. She is NOT someone to admire or respect. She treated Jon like dirt and she treats her children like pets.

Admin, thank you for creating this spot for us to vent our frustrations!

Anonymous said...

Pets? Sheesh my dog gets better treatment. I work so I can feed HIM. I work so I can take HIM to the vet. I work so I can buy HIM cute little outfits. I inconvenience myself to take HIM for a stupid walk.

He doesn't work for me!

SchmeckyGirl said...

But the kids have all their memories in DVD! you want them to get a paycheck too?

Yeah, Kate was working while the kids were playing. I laughed at that one too. What a joke. You have to hand it to her... She's got a great sense of humor.

TV Snark: ;) I knew the non-fans would know I wasn't serious. There's no way Kate would let them color with markers! ;)

SchmeckyGirl said...

just.me,

I'm at a loss too. I don't see how anyone can admire Kate after the way she treated her spouse. They'll even say they cringe at things she's said or at how she treated Jon, but they still back her. My favorite is when they say they like her because she is who she is and doesn't apologize for it. WTH?!?!?!????!!!

cherier1 said...

From the People mag article at Preesi's

"You only get to be a kid once." --Kate

Truly delusional.

cherier1 said...

I think her fans see themselves mirrored in her. They defend her at all costs or they must look at themselves....

cherier1 said...

just.me - What do agents get when they rep a client? WHO gets an 85% cut?! It boggles the mind!

AuntieAnn said...

" We doubt the Gosselin kids know just how rich they've made their parents. Until they become of age, only the public can insist they are fairly compensated and protected."

I agree with you Admin, although I don't think they will wait until they become of age. I think Mady and Cara will be asking a lot of questions, if they haven't already, about the money - among other things. Mady especially was savvy to a lot of her moms shenanigans when she was only six or seven, so I'm sure she'll start interrogating her mom long before she turns eighteen. Kate better have some answers ready when that happens or there will be lawyers coming out of the woodwork ready to help those kids get whats owing them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rest in Peace, Gary
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

AnneG said...

Kate's quote in the current People magazine - "I'm working and the kids are playing"- sounds like a disrespectful jab at the PA Dept of Labor, since TLC was required to obtain work permits for filming after the Dept of Labor determined that the Gosselin children are employees. It appears that TLC and Kate are not accepting that ruling even if TLC is giving it lip service in PA. Somehow I'm doubtful that TLC is obtaining work permits in Florida or NY; and PA seems fairly disinterested in the fate of the Gosselin children, so Discovery/TLC may get away with it.

pa mom too said...

Rest in Peace , Gary .

Don't you all know that Kate deserves this money from her children because of what they put her through during the pregnancy ? Poor Kate. And now everyone picks on her and thinks she's stealing the kid's money. All of the money should be hers because if it wasn't for her, they wouldn't be here. They owe her for their lives, and for all of the daily sacrifices she makes for them.

Laura D. said...

Hi AuntieAnne: Do you remember Johnny Whittaker of Family Affair? I saw him on a TV interview several years ago and he talked about his co-star Alisa Jones (Buffy) who had died at 18 just as she was "about to come into her money." Her parents had put her money away for her. On the other hand, when Johnny had asked about HIS money, his mother explained that it "had gone into the family" and she reminded him of college for him and his sibs, the house, vacations, etc. (And he must have made quite a bit of $$$ as he did a few movies as well.) This is how Kate will handle those questions if she hasn't already. She always told the kids "this is our family job." I'm sure they've been conditioned (brainwashed) not to expect any money.

lolly said...

I saw an old interview last night where Gary Coleman parents were defending why he worked during dialysis. At times he was physically ill and tired. Their response..."We didn't make him do anything, he wanted to do it, we said that it would stop as soon as he said the word".

Sound familar?

PaMa said...

On a positive note, and assuming that money is being put aside for the kids, left in place, and invested wisely via the trust, that money will increase many times over, during the next 12-15 years. Sometimes it's good to remember the glass is half full. Although the initial amount set aside may fall far short of what they actually earned, at least the kids will have a tidy sum to get them started in life.

French Canadian said...

I've listen to Jon and Kate yesterday in French on the Web. With the translation it gives the impression that Kate is a sweet personne, we don't here her tone of voice. Even when she shouts in English, the translation is sweet. You could be under the impession that she is joking.

my9cats said...

Steph said...
snipped...
"With the calculations above...well, I am sure the kids' private school, medical expenses and the like will eat up a majority of the money. They won't have much at all when they turn 18. In fact, I can picture Kate telling them they have to take out student loans and work part time to pay for school themselves. That would be fine if she hadn't already sold them out.."

Wasn't Kate also quoted as saying the kids would have to "earn" and buy their own cars?
Seems as though she already knew there would be nothing for the kinds.

Idontgetit said...

This has been said before but it bears repeating....Kate and the kids are doing the SAME THING. How is it working for Kate and playing for them????

It's like saying we're all eating apples but it's healthy for them but unhealthy for me. WTF.

a real person ;) said...

Can someone link to the law that states that 15% of the family slaary goes to the kids to be split, and that the parents can dip into the fund for education and care-related expenses? Thanks.

Administrator said...

It is not a law but a hack "DEAL" they reached with the PA Department of Labor to get them off their backs. TLC themselves explained the deal:

Laurie Goldberg of TLC stated as follows: At least 15 percent of the gross proceeds due to the children must be placed in trust funds until they reach the age of 18 or unless needed for their safety, education, welfare or health.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2010/04/pennsylvania_opts_for_no_legal.html

AuntieAnn said...

Being the greedy narcissist that she is, Kate will use that little "unless" inserted in the ruling as a good excuse to keep spending like a drunken sailor. When the circus leaves town Kate the conniver will find a way to make herself look like a martyr. Crying to Meredith on the Today Show that she's broke again will be one way.

Even if the kids do get any money out of this, they've lost so much that money can't replace.

Anonymous said...

Tuition at their school is about $18,000. By the calculations here, their cut of $100,000 isn't even enough to cover one child's tuition.

itsaboutthekids said...

...or unless needed for their safety, education, welfare or health.

This statement could include absolutely everything needed to raise these children. The three basics, food, clothing and shelter could fall under health and welfare as well as any dental, medical bills. Those multiple trips they take for filming could be considered educational. And I suppose the expense of a body guard for mom (and the kids when they're around) is written off as a safety expense.

So does that mean the 85% Kate makes off of selling her kids only has to pay for her adult needs and entertainment? Not too many loopholes in this little gem, is there? I can see that 15% dwindling down to almost nothing.

Anonymous said...

The Gosselin children are staring out at me from every newstand I have passed today at the same time I have learned of the death of Gary Coleman. I have heard that he should have been in more comfortable circumstances due to his earnings in childhood. I am terribly afraid that the Gosselin children in ten or fifteen years will find their earnings will not be "there" and their childhood will be lost forever - they will be show business tragedies.

just.me said...

I still don't know what happened with the boycott. Has Kelly been posting? How did it go?

AuntieAnn said...

Anonymous said... Tuition at their school is about $18,000. By the calculations here, their cut of $100,000 isn't even enough to cover one child's tuition.

That's what an income is for. Kate doesn't get that concept. Most parents support their children, not the other way around. If Kate wants her kids in a private school of her choice, she and Jon should damn well pay for it. She keeps bellyaching about how she needs to support her family, being a 'single' mom and all so she'd better be doing just that. That $21,000 that Jon is tossing in from supposedly shutting his mouth so TLC can keep filming the kids should help pay the household expenses too.

cherier1 said...

just.me,

No one ( to my knowledge ) has heard from Kelly yet.

TheresaB said...

just.me,
A boycott is ongoing. I'd hope most of the readers here have been boycotting TLC and the products advertised on Kate plus 8.

Protest is people physically showing up someplace with signs to make a statement.
Nobody has heard from Kelly to know if this occurred.

Boycott is ongoing.

disgusted in pa said...

The children should each be entitled to 1/9 (assuming there are nine people in the family on the show-no Jon) of the gross earnings--to be placed in an irrevocable trust fund that can not be touched by anyone, for any reason--but the child in question when he/she becomes of age.
As has been said, if the adults are considered to be working, then the children should be considered to be working. For example, if adults are paid to pick apples, then children should be paid for doing the same, no? You wouldn't say, "No, the mom's only working; the children are just having fun," would you? It's a ridiculous argument put forth by people who would stand to gain financially by using children as cheap or unpaid labor, IMO.
And, if Kate is so important to TLC and has so much clout, why can't she negotiate better terms for her children? Limits on what can and can not be filmed, # of episodes, etc. as well as money for each of the kids could be or could have been negotiated if she truly had the kids' best interests at heart and not her own quest for fame and fortune.

Anonymous said...

Not only is it ridiculous to suggest Kate is working and the children aren't they're just having fun....but, wait a minute, I enjoy my job. I have FUN at my job. I got into this line of work because it's fun. Should I not be paid since I'm having fun? I should just do my job for free it's so much fun.

More twisted logic from team Kate.

Bonnie said...

Lets be serious. You and I both know that Kate will make sure those funds are depleted before those kids reach 18. That GIANT loophole allowing her to use the money for their support, guarantees it!

How sad for those 8 kids. Looking forward to seeing the lawsuit the G8 will file!

PA Mom ALSO said...

"Tuition at their school is about $18,000."

Tuition varies according to grade level. You're quoting upper school tuition, the highest cost. Pre-K, part-time tuition (individual) is not $18,000 (far from it) and neither is the twins. However, down the road, they can expect to pay that (and more, when it increases).
That is...if they're not in California by then.

JudyK said...

Awaiting the expected set-up photo-op either Sunday or Monday for the Labor Day celebration with Kate's "dear friend" Steve in front of her home. Am hoping that the newest People spread goes the route of her now-dead book sales.

AuntieAnn said...

Laura D.,
I do remember Johnny Whittaker from Family Affair but I didn't know his family had spent his earnings.

It's a different story when children grow up and help their parents because they have the money and WANT to do it. But to take money from your children when they have no say in it is like dipping into their piggybank while they're sleeping. Stealing, in other words.

toonces said...

Admin, I just wanted to clarify what the college funds from the state of PA are. What the then Lt. Govenor did was open 8 TAP funds for the Gosselin children, I believe it was on the tups first birthday. The state may have put a token deposit in each one, but what the Lt. Gov. said in her statement was that anyone would be welcome to make a deposit in the funds by calling her office or something like that. The TAP fund is a PA college savings account with certain advantages, to be used for any college in PA. I would bet anything Kate was LIVID about this, because the McCaughey septuplets got totally free college tuitions promised to them by their state. The Gosselin tups were only getting accounts opened for them for people to contribute to. I felt from the get-go (I live 15 miles from where the tups were born & they were all over the media) that Kate was obsessed with matching the quantity and value of the donations the McCaugheys received. They bitched and moaned for that 15 passenger van for a year until they gave up and probably got Jon's Dad to buy them one.

Those TAP funds kept biting Jon and Kate in the ass because college was the number one thing they would whine about when they were on the church scamming tour. People would inevitably ask about the TAP funds, thinking the kids had their tuitions paid in full.

MickeyMcKean said...

Yesterday I stopped at a "hole in the wall" antique store and while I am walking the aisles I could hear the owner on the phone saying things like, "she claims she is a single mom ... says she has to work ... does it all by herself".

When she hangs up I said, "I'm sorry, I couldn't help but overhear ... by any chance were you talking about Kate Gosselin?"

After she stopped laughing she said, "No, but that is someone else I have a problem with every time she says she is a good mom!!!".

We both busted up and then compared our thoughts on Kate :)

Then this morning I am in Home Depot looking at new stoves. Salesman is pushing me to electronic stove top (with no wire burners) and I said, "I used to watch J&K+8 and I remember an episode where Kate's stove blew up when she put a lid on it" and he said, "I can't stand that woman!!!"

I busted up laughing!!! Then he said, "I could not stand how she talked to Jon ... how she cut ties with her own brother ... and she can't dance! Did you see her paso doble on DWTS!?!?"

I told him that if he has not seen it to google Jimmy Fallon. Then while I'm still laughing this guy continues on his tirade about Kate - fact is he was saying all the same things as my BF but this guy did not use the "c" word - must be because he was at work LOL.

He said, "I was tired of her going on and on about her damn kids and about her new shows on DWTS. Hey, did you know her new book is crap?"

While giggling I said, "I'm sure her time on DWTS will be her downfall because I think it was supposed to gain her new fans for her new shows but Kate herself screwed it up. Just be sure NOT to watch the new shows because if there are no viewers, there is no show!"

And then in unison we said, "it IS about the kids - they need to get off the TV".

He will NOT be watching and in fact he had no intention of watching the new shows.

Oh my as I'm tying this I realized something ... good thing this guy gave me his card as I am sure he will want to know when Al Walentis publishes his book about Jon and Kate!

Anyway, just thought this blog would want to know that I had two interesting interactions with complete strangers and yet we all agree that we are sick and tired of All Things Gosselin!

SAVE THE 8 - DO NOT WATCH KATE + 8!!!

CJ said...

Administrator said...

It is not a law but a hack "DEAL" they reached with the PA Department of Labor to get them off their backs. TLC themselves explained the deal:

Laurie Goldberg of TLC stated as follows: At least 15 percent of the gross proceeds due to the children must be placed in trust funds until they reach the age of 18 or unless needed for their safety, education, welfare or health.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Administrator ~ I deal with numbers and dollars in my job. This has been nagging at me for awhile. I want to point out something that I think everyone is missing, if I'm reading Ms Goldberg's statement correctly. She says: "At least 15% of the gross DUE TO THE KIDS".


Everyone is reading this as the kids are to get 15% of the gross TLC pays for each show. Wrong! TLC is saying it's 15% of "what ever amount they say the kids should get". The numbers everyone has been kicking around is $100K per show, meaning kids get 15K, split eight ways = $1875 each. Hypothetically, TLC could say each kid is due $5000 with 15% going into trust. That would be $750 per child. If they are paying 100k per show with kids getting that amount, then kids would be technically receiving 40% and Kate 60%. Sounds good on paper, Right? But if only 15% of that goes into a trust for them, it's ONLY 6% of the total. And, Kate legally gets to spend the other 94% any old way she wants.

And, I'm betting my numbers are closer to the truth than the BS that is spewing out of the mouths of TLC execs.

Administrator said...

CJ you could be absolutely right about that.

We do have numbers for what everyone makes. But we have no idea what each individual child's salary is.

Even though the Coogan law in CA is a great thing, it's never seemed fair. Why can't a child keep 100% of their salary, period end of story??? Why can't their parents be forced to support their families like every other parent in America who doesn't have a child in show biz does?

CJ said...

Admin ~ Trust me, I think I'm correct. I have to read and interpret IRS tax codes... and this line of BS reads like Government tax regs.

Anonymous said...

The Gosselin children are living their lives in reverse. They are child TV stars and as adults they will suffer the results of this stardom. Gary Coleman and Lindsay Lohan come to mind.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
my9cats said...

Just wondering. If CA's Coogan Law is so great how come kids are still being ripped off. Gary Coleman comes to mind.

Livvy said...

Great article from Z on TV of the Baltimore Sun

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/zontv/2010/05/kate_plus_8_kids_on_reality_tv.html#comments

Bonnie said...

The Today Show Sunday edition just announced that Kate will be on next Sunday to talk about her new shows.

The love affair continues and I'm thinking that a bus ride to NYC might be nice next weekend.

Administrator said...

The Coogan Law was not in existance when most of these stars who had problems were children. It was NOT in existance when Gary Coleman's parents stole his money.

The Coogan Fund is a step in the right direction. Fifteen percent is better than 0 percent. CA also has restrictive laws on hours you can film, an on set teacher, schooling, etc. It's not just the money that makes their laws better.

Their laws are better, not great.

itsaboutthekids said...

Bonnie said...
The Today Show Sunday edition just announced that Kate will be on next Sunday to talk about her new shows.

What could Kate possibly say that we haven't already heard? I think I'm busy that morning.

pa mom too said...

MickeyMcKean, that's pretty funny about the woman in the antique store and the guy in Home Depot. Where are all of these people who love Kate , even if it's only 10%....where are they ? LOL !

CJ, I do believe you are correct on the money issue. The kids will get 15% of what's due to them. It's similar to reading the fine print on a contract, and actually understanding what you're reading. So even if anyone knew how much money Kate was being paid (in full) for the show, only a small portion is for the children (and who knows what that amount might be)... they will only get 15% of that, and have to split it 8 ways. wow.... what a deal !!

With all the money Kate will have saved for the kids by the time they are teens ;) especially when she will be allowed to use their portion for medical and school expenses , and with inflation going up daily, they each might be able to buy a Big Mac.

Denise said...

"In one of the more famous recent cases of child actor exploitation, Gary Coleman ("Diff'rent Strokes") had to sue his own parents to recoup millions of dollars of earnings. Coleman's parents had money set aside under California's "Coogan Law" (discussed infra) to create a pension fund, ostensibly to protect Coleman's interests in the income he generated. However, Coleman's parents structured the arrangement to name themselves as paid employees of Coleman's production company. When the court finally dissolved the pension fund, the parents' share was worth $770,000, while Coleman himself had only $220,000. According to Newsday, Coleman successfully sued his parents and managers for $3.8 million. "

http://www.minorcon.org/childrenaschattels.html

my9cats said...

http://www.aftrasagfcu.org/coogan_accounts/coogan_faqs.cfm

The Coogan Law came into effect in 1938 and updated in 2000. Any child actor should have been protected somehow since 1938. Wouldn't this have included TV?

PA Mom ALSO said...

"The Coogan Law was not in existance when most of these stars who had problems were children. It was NOT in existance when Gary Coleman's parents stole his money."

---------------------

Do you mean the CURRENT Coogan Law? The original law was passed in 1939. Coleman sued his parents in 1989. Of course, there were changes made in 2000 because the original law had so many flaws, but the law was in existence when Coleman sued his parents.

AuntieAnn said...

Bonnie said...The Today Show Sunday edition just announced that Kate will be on next Sunday to talk about her new shows.

Well... isn't that exciting. I wonder how many people are sitting on the edge of their chairs just waiting to see her face again. I can't even be bothered to watch a preview of kate+8. I'm afraid I'll hear that hideous cackle of hers. It's like Jim Carrey's most annoying sound in the world from Dumb and Dumber. Unless the show involved a private session of Kate and a psychiatrist working through all her personality disorders - and there are many - there is nothing left to watch.

Administrator said...

You are right the Coogan law has been around a long time. What I said was misleading. But the old law was revised in 2000 and has been revised at least once since then. The revision is signficantly different and affords a lot more protection than the original law.

AMC explains some of the new changes. They lobbied to get it passed: http://www.minorcon.org/newcoogan.html

In CA, ALL of the money belongs to the child. While a percentage must be set aside in trust, the other percentage still belongs to the minor. Unnauthorized use by the parents is STEALING under the new law.

CA is the best state for the children to be in, which is why Kate will never move there.

PA Mom ALSO said...

"Bonnie said...The Today Show Sunday edition just announced that Kate will be on next Sunday to talk about her new shows."

------------------

Does anyone know where she's going on her Twisted Kate venture? What poor soul is she showing how to make peanut butter and cucumber sandwiches, or how to get the best bang for her buck in organic tanning salons?

MickeyMcKean said...

pa mom too said...
MickeyMcKean, that's pretty funny about the woman in the antique store and the guy in Home Depot. Where are all of these people who love Kate , even if it's only 10%....where are they ? LOL !

============================

I forgot to mention that I found it interesting to note that both these two people are clueless about the Gosselin blogs. They had no idea when I told them about them.

Which means that their reactions to Kate is thanks to Kate's overexposure - especially on DWTS!! :)

I also found myself smiling after meeting both of them - Kate's days are numbered, I'm sure of it!!!!

TO SAVE THE 8 - DO NOT WATCH KATE PLUS 8!!!

Linda in NS said...

@ Whomever said Kate treats her kids like pets I have two words I WISH. If Kate treated her kids like pets they would have been sent back to somebody else to watch. Anybody remember those puppies? Nah, Kate treats her kids like servants/slaves.

Anonymous said...

Animals are required to have water on set!

AuntieAnn said...

The little Watergate scene was a perfect example of Kate's phony tv persona. She was about to hand Mady the bottle of water after she'd had some, but then the interview started so she hid it behind her chair. Why didn't she just give it to her and go on talking? No one would have cared. She almost did a motherly thing, but stopped. Why? Whats wrong with giving your kid water? It was a trivial incident that spoke volumes about her 'realness' that she's so freaking proud of.

pa mom too said...

MickeyMcKean, I also think Kate's days are numbered. Just so they aren't numbered into the tens of thousands. LOL !

Carolina Gal said...

She almost did a motherly thing, but stopped. Why? Whats wrong with giving your kid water? It was a trivial incident that spoke volumes about her 'realness' that she's so freaking proud of.
~~
I think that was the real Kate. She is all about her kids looking 'perfect'. I guess drinking water would have been a no-no on camera.

dee3 said...

Sorry I've not been posting but for some reason, the writing has become tiny and unreadable for me. My son said it had to be the site...but it can't be because others are posting here and the letters are so tiny for me that I literally cannot read what I'm typing (in case there are typos). I will have to ask my son about this again when he[s off from works

dee

dee3 said...

Sorry I've not been posting but for some reason, the writing has become tiny and unreadable for me. My son said it had to be the site...but it can't be because others are posting here and the letters are so tiny for me that I literally cannot read what I'm typing (in case there are typos). I will have to ask my son about this again when he[s off from works

dee

AuntieAnn said...

The little Watergate scene was a perfect example of Kate's phony tv persona. She was about to hand Mady the bottle of water after she'd had some, but then the interview started so she hid it behind her chair. Why didn't she just give it to her and go on talking? No one would have cared. She almost did a motherly thing, but stopped. Why? Whats wrong with giving your kid water? It was a trivial incident that spoke volumes about her 'realness' that she's so freaking proud of.

Linda in NS said...

@ Whomever said Kate treats her kids like pets I have two words I WISH. If Kate treated her kids like pets they would have been sent back to somebody else to watch. Anybody remember those puppies? Nah, Kate treats her kids like servants/slaves.

Denise said...

"In one of the more famous recent cases of child actor exploitation, Gary Coleman ("Diff'rent Strokes") had to sue his own parents to recoup millions of dollars of earnings. Coleman's parents had money set aside under California's "Coogan Law" (discussed infra) to create a pension fund, ostensibly to protect Coleman's interests in the income he generated. However, Coleman's parents structured the arrangement to name themselves as paid employees of Coleman's production company. When the court finally dissolved the pension fund, the parents' share was worth $770,000, while Coleman himself had only $220,000. According to Newsday, Coleman successfully sued his parents and managers for $3.8 million. "

http://www.minorcon.org/childrenaschattels.html

Administrator said...

The Coogan Law was not in existance when most of these stars who had problems were children. It was NOT in existance when Gary Coleman's parents stole his money.

The Coogan Fund is a step in the right direction. Fifteen percent is better than 0 percent. CA also has restrictive laws on hours you can film, an on set teacher, schooling, etc. It's not just the money that makes their laws better.

Their laws are better, not great.

Bonnie said...

The Today Show Sunday edition just announced that Kate will be on next Sunday to talk about her new shows.

The love affair continues and I'm thinking that a bus ride to NYC might be nice next weekend.

Anonymous said...

What's up, after reading this amazing paragraph i am also delighted to share my familiarity here with colleagues.
Also visit my site ... drum tobacco