tamika-fuller-2_zpsqcvfgz7uTamika Fuller wants to have her say, and in a ‘penned’ essay, she does just that. After losing custody of her daughter to Ludacris, Fuller recounts how he tried to bribe her into having an abortion, and also states that the only reason he wanted custody of the child was to be vengeful and to keep from paying child support.

According to TheYBF.com, Fuller wrote:

The psychological manipulation began immediately. He broke down in tears when I told him that I wanted to keep our baby, and he begged me to abort the child whose heartbeat was developing in rhythm with my own. He told me that it would destroy his career and his image. I contemplated heavily on terminating my pregnancy. I don’t believe in forced parenthood or trapping anyone into raising an unwanted child. However, when I visited the clinic and heard my daughter’s heartbeat on the ultrasound, I knew I couldn’t go through with it.

He promised me the world – trips on his private jet and other perks of the rich and famous – if I would just have the abortion. He made me feel as if I was ruining us. It was as if he believed that our friendship should take precedence over the life growing inside of me and when he realized that it didn’t, it couldn’t, my real nightmare began.

Fuller also criticized a system that has faulted men for the longest in granting them custody, that it’s now easier for men to get custody of their children, especially if they’re rich. Fuller stated the only reason she wasn’t working full-time was because she took time off to take care of her child.

In the essay, Fuller also stated that she wants to become an advocate for women who are going through custody battles with their ‘exes’.

What I found interesting about the essay was that it was well written, but led me to believe that it’s a publicity stunt. One has to wonder how soon before Ludacris asks a judge for a gag order. And for the record, he still gets the gas face.

Tags: , ,
Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • CoolChic

    Sorry she lost custody but More men would have full custody of their children if they actually fight for them. The mother being the default custodian should end in my opinion.

    • elsay

      I agree.

    • TeflonD

      Exactly. Matter of fact, if I was a judge, I would always grant custody to the first stable parent that agrees not to collect any form of child support.

      Institute that as law, and I bet you these custody cases would clear up fast.

    • Michelle

      Thank goodness you didn’t decide to persue an education in family law.

      …And this is coming from a woman that grew up in a single parent household in which my father’s monthly, court-mandated financial help keep a roof over our heads, as well as, food in our bellies.

    • TeflonD

      You clearly do not comprehend what I wrote.

    • blogdiz

      Apparently neither do you

    • TeflonD

      Really? Lol. Speaking of comprehension, not only is the hogwash you wrote up top completely fictional, it also shows absolutely no favoritism towards men. So you clearly cannot process logic either.

      All of this emotional outburst devoid of reason does nothing but give feminism a bad name. Carry on.

    • blogdiz

      Tip for the day
      Ad hominem fallacy

      An attack upon an opponent in order to discredit their arguement or opinion. Ad hominems are used by immature and/or unintelligent people because they are unable to counter their opponent using logic and intelligence.

    • TeflonD

      Lol. Nice try. Okay, I’m just gonna go up and tear apart the fictional story you wrote up top.. since you’re either too dishonest or slow to take a hint.

    • blogdiz

      This your post ‘If I was a judge, I would always grant custody to the first stable parent to forfeit mandatory child support”

      You basically greatly oversimplified a very complex process which is designed to ensure the best interest of the child and takes many factors into consideration , another poster who actually has this as her life experience disagreed with you and what did you do?
      …Lets see further develop your point or respond to her based on the merits of her post ….Nope you attacked her comprehension skills
      I also responded and what did you do attack and insult a post that wasn’t even related to my response to you
      You are actually proving my point with these angry rants and insults ….so Carry on here Cuz I’m done

    • TeflonD

      “The first stable parent to forfeit mandatory child support.” Is hardly an oversimplification if you understand the language and the concept of conditionals. It actually does privilege the best interest of the child. It also inherently discourages using children as pawns and has the long-term effect of discouraging irresponsible and incompetent parenting.

      I did not attack the poster because if you look at what she wrote, you will find that she actually does not present a counterargument to anything I’ve said.

      Luda’s ex lost custody because she’s an incompetent and unfit parent, period. Opting to have a child (against the father’s will) who she was demonstrably incapable of taking care of effectively renders her an irresponsible parent at best and a sundry gold digger. I don’t understand why she is mad when the judge simply read her for what she is and passed a judicious verdict. Ludacris is a stable parent and is obviously neither asking for mandatory child support nor using a child to play vindictive on a public forum. We need more judges like that.

      You are the one spewing emotional feminist rhetoric which I have dismantled piece by piece, and predictably, you are unable to defend a single one of your loopy anti-male drivel.

    • blogdiz

      Actually women having full custody occurs because those men dont ask for full custody .in cased where men ask for full custody if they are better off financially remarried etc ( and apparently now famous ) they tend to be awarded custody
      This is a part of patriarchy that favors men (even black men ) especially against BW
      The reality is we set the bar lower for fatherhood than motherhood a father who is even remotely interested in custody or his kids welfare is seen as a magical unicorn worthy of custody over a mother who is there day in day out is just taken for granted

    • TeflonD

      “Actually women having full custody occurs because those men dont ask for full custody.”

      – Sources? None, because it’s a bold-faced lie.

      “They tend to be awarded custody.”

      – Unsubstantiated hogwash.

      “This is a part of patriarchy that favors men (even black men ) especially against BW”

      – Self-pitying feminist drivel.

      “The reality is we set the bar lower for fatherhood than motherhood a father who is even remotely interested in custody or his kids welfare is seen as a magical unicorn worthy of custody over a mother who is there day in day out is just taken for granted”

      – Just dumb, reaching, and shamelessly dishonest. The only gender-coded elements of U.S. family law favor women. Stop lying all over the place and save your baseless feminist rants for the uninformed.

    • Pema

      It’s his child too.

  • Me

    i’m not one to jump on a woman’s side just b/c she’s the female parent in a custody battle. ludacris obviously has the financial security to take care of his kids as the primary custodian. so i really don’t care if his motivation was to keep from having to pay child support. that child will likely live a much more comfortable life with dad especially since dad is married, so there will be two parents in that home (not sure of mom’s household situation). it’s always tough to hear that you’re not the best option for your own children, but as a mom, i would hope she could see the father in ludacris & put her grievances aside for the sake of the kid. better to be a secondary parent that has the right to be a part of the child’s life than to be the absent parent that the courts took all rights away from b/c of the bickering. choose your battles & put the child first.

  • Delia

    I’m glad they have to policy of making the mother goes through the ultrasound before the abortion. Once you realize there is life inside, it gives another perspective. Thank God a child was saved.

    • BillipPhailey

      Please. This is written to garner sympathy. Legislative intervention in medical procedures is governmental overreach and invasive.

    • Me

      that’s not a government policy. they only do the ultrasound to verify the age & existence of a fetus. no one is required to see or hear the ultrasound before an abortion. every pregnant woman has the right to refuse.

    • Delia

      Depends on the state. Florida, Arkansas, Georgia, Alabama, Ohio and a good amount more equalling about half the states have some form of REQUIRED ultrasound before abortion. Now they’re proposing a federal requirement.

    • Me

      i think the requirements are only for the dr’s b/c they have to prove that the baby wasn’t aborted after a certain trimester. but that doesn’t apply to the patient. the dr can do the ultrasound w/o requiring the woman to view it or listen to it.

    • Delia

      Oh. Gotchya. Thanks.

    • Me

      np

    • Delia

      I know the essence of this letter.

      To each its own. I’m glad the ‘overreach and invasive’ policy of an ultrasound before abortion worked in this case. Or maybe she was referring to a routine ultrasound. Either way, I’m black child was saved. Check out eugenics on the black community.

    • elsay

      Anti-choice rhetoric?

  • Crystal Campbell

    Wait, so because it was well-written, this is a publicity stunt? I’m missing something here. Why can’t she just be trying to be HEARD? Why are you surprised that the woman can write?

    • Michelle

      Mmmm… lemme see…
      Internalized misogyny?
      The prevailing stereotype of “women who has consenting sex with rappers are ignorant cows that are lazy and uneducated as well as her loose morals”?
      Classism?
      Take your pick…

    • Crystal Campbell

      I definitely understand how those things are at play here and that would have been an excellent direction in which to take the article….but none of those things are even MENTIONED or implied by the author. The author states that what is “interesting about the essay was that it was well written, but led me to believe that it’s a publicity stunt.”
      Which implies that the woman shouldn’t be able to write well…and that because she CAN write well, this MUST be a publicity stunt. That sentence demonstrates the “internalized misogyny and prevailing stereotypes”, for sure. It’s an unfortunate assumption for the author to imply,

      I’m also surprised that her editor didn’t catch the verb tense errors in the sentence.

  • Her eloquent letter is interesting. I heard of the custody dispute in the news, but I don’t know all of the facts of this story. Right now, Ludacris won custody of the child. I don’t realize the truth about who is totally right and who’s totally wrong. I do realize that the judge has made a decision. Both she and Ludacris have the right to tell their stories. Ludacris has large monetary wealth, so that is one reason (out of many factors) in my opinion on why he won custody. What is most important is the well-being of the child. The interests’ and the experiences of the child should have the primary importance involving this situation. Long term, hopefully both parents can reconcile in some way, so the child can have the opportunity to learn lessons from both the biological mother and the biological father.