NADINE DORRIES: Why I'm on Team Sophie

NADINE DORRIES: Why I’m on Team Sophie in the showbiz divorce of the year

When the cracks appear in a marriage, the children are the first to fall into them.

This is certainly true for the breakdown of the relationship between British actress Sophie Turner, Game Of Thrones ‘Queen in the North’, and U.S. singer-songwriter Joe Jonas, a former Disney child star.

At the beginning of September, Joe filed for divorce in Florida, hoping to bring to an end their marriage of four years – and starting a very unhappy time for their two daughters, Willa, aged three, and a 14-month-old whose name is not known but is referred to in court documents as ‘D.J.’.

By launching his case in Miami, Joe, 34, hoped to ensure that the divorce would be heard under Florida state law – where the presumption in child custody hearings is that an equal time-sharing arrangement with both parents is in the children’s best interests.

Initially, many were quick to judge 27-year-old Sophie for having apparently left it to Joe to look after their two girls as he toured America with his band, the Jonas Brothers, while she was filming in Britain, for several months earlier this year.

At the beginning of September, Joe Jonas (left) filed for divorce in Florida, hoping to bring to an end to his marriage of four years with Sophie Turner (right)

Jonas was seen taking out his daughters for breakfast for first time since filing for divorce from Turner

Claims started to circulate that the marriage had fallen apart because Sophie wanted to spend her time partying, while he was looking after their girls. Sources close to Sophie have said: ‘She’s furious that she’s being painted by people close to him as this hard-partying booze hound, which she says is totally exaggerated.’

But the tide has turned. The court of public opinion has started to see that Joe himself is apparently no angel – and his own actions raise ‘concerns’.

Was Joe secretly meeting with divorce lawyers – while still proudly posting pictures online with him wearing his wedding ring, and also wearing it during performances?

Then, last Thursday, Sophie took Joe to court in New York claiming that he was withholding their children’s passports, preventing them from joining her in England – which, she claims, she and Joe had agreed last Christmas would be their ‘forever home’.

Before that, Sophie had even used a child ‘abduction’ clause in the Hague Convention to try to get her children back and bring them home.

This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone: I would have done the same. These girls have a life in the UK – and Sophie’s life and work are here.

Joe has bridled against the word ‘abduction’, as if Sophie had any control over the Hague wording; but if you don’t allow the children to return to the UK with their mother, then what is she to do?

READ MORE: Sophie Turner and Joe Jonas had lunch together with their children just days before she sued him in bid to take their kids back to the UK… amid their bitter divorce

Joe should return the children’s passports, they should come back to the UK and settle down into the life that their parents thought – until very recently – was the best for them.

Both can co-parent, and school holidays Stateside will always be an option, along with visiting.

Last night, it emerged in court documents that the couple had reached a ceasefire for now, both of them agreeing to temporarily keep their two young children in New York State. All this bitterness has led many women to take the side of Sophie, believing Joe is responsible.

Just look at Taylor Swift – one of Joe’s distant exes, who he famously dumped by voicemail years ago – taking Sophie out for a very public supportive dinner in New York last week.

Women are speaking out on Sophie’s behalf – and Joe obviously never expected that kind of backlash.

I have news for you, Joe. The backlash is going to get worse.

Suella really must solve this sad royal rift 

After their triumphant State visit to France last week, I hope King Charles and Queen Camilla are enjoying a G+T or two. All those people who said Charles would struggle to step into his mother’s shoes have been forced to eat their words. The royal visit did more for international relations than any politician ever could.

But I can only imagine the pang Charles must have felt knowing that his success abroad is tempered by the ongoing family rift with Harry and Meghan. As a parent, you are only ever as happy as your least-happy child, whether that child is four or 40 (as Harry will be next year).

After their triumphant State visit to France last week, I hope King Charles and Queen Camilla are enjoying a G+T or two, writes Nadine Dorries 

Charles will know that two issues go to the heart of whether he can heal this rift. The first is the issue of protection.

When the Sussexes are in Britain, the threat to their security is serious and genuine. This problem falls on the shoulders of the Home Office: as I know all too well, a basket-case of a department. To say Harry can’t have full police protection, even if he pays for it himself, is a nonsense. Suella Braverman needs to get this sorted.

The second thorn is accommodation on the Royal Estate.

There are enough rooms in Kensington Palace: let Harry and Meghan have a few so they have a safe and familiar place to stay. The children can get to know it – and it will give them a strong sense of their heritage.

Prince Harry will always be of royal blood, and though family rifts are always painful, time is a great healer.

Leave those walnuts alone!

There is a walnut tree in my village, and on my daily dog walk I now see people collecting fallen walnuts.

Already, the hedgerows are stripped bare of blackberries as visitors in 4x4s alighted for an afternoon’s picking.

I fight the instinct to tell foragers to leave them for the birds and squirrels, who don’t have the ability to walk into their local Tesco and buy them.

Yes, we’re a nation of pet lovers, but me shouting, ‘Leave the walnuts for the rats with furry tails!’ might be a step too far.

I fight the instinct to tell foragers to leave the walnuts for the birds and squirrels, who don’t have the ability to walk into their local Tesco and buy them (File image)

Sir Mark Thompson, former Director-General of the BBC, has come under scrutiny over how much he knew about the predatory behaviour of Russell Brand.

Thompson has had a successful career in the U.S. since leaving the BBC, but good luck getting any answers out of him. In February 2012, back when he was DG, I took him to task over the fact that there were hardly any women in senior positions in the BBC. What’s more, older female TV presenters were regularly being sidelined, and on BBC Radio women presenters were badly outnumbered by men. He came to my office in Westminster for a meeting, which was kind of him. But when he left, I realised he had spoken the entire time and I hadn’t got a word in edgeways.

Thompson is an astute political operator. No one will get anything out of him about Brand, of that I am sure.

I am steaming about Debbie Arnold’s comments on Dame Joan Collins yesterday on Good Morning Britain.

The actress said Dame Joan could not be considered a sex symbol at 90 because: ‘If you had sex with her, she would fall to pieces.’

How mean and disrespectful. Older women know exactly who they are, don’t need to please anyone and are full of confidence, character and, yes, sex appeal.

Joan and her fellow acting dames Joanna Lumley and Helen Mirren are my role models when it comes to sexiness. Pay no attention, Dame Joan. You’re the epitome of style and sexiness — and we love you.

Source: Read Full Article