Naleigh Kelley: Toting The Grub

Naleigh Kelley: Toting The Grub

3-year old Naleigh Kelley, the adopted daughter of Grey’s Anatomy alum Katherine Heigl and her husband Josh Kelley, was put to work on Friday (April 20) in Los Feliz, Calif. The tot was helping the nanny bring the groceries into the house.

The cooperative cutie – who was carrying a bag half her size – looked adorable in a red tank top with a matching grey and red skirt.

It was earlier reported that the initial connection Heigl had with her little girl was challenging and the hardest time of her life, but things have turned around for the family.

In January, the Knocked Up star spoke with Parent & Child about how she and Naleigh established their bond.

I had to embrace who I am as a parent. I watched Josh, and it was so effortless for him. I call him Disneyland Dad — he’ll get on the floor and roll around and make her laugh. That wasn’t really me. So I felt like, oh gosh, I’m not the kind of parent she prefers. Then I realized — I’m the cuddler. I’m the one she comes to if she’s hurt. And I have a ritual for putting her to bed. She has one blankie that goes over her, one that goes by her face, and one that she holds. It’s our little thing.”

View Slideshow »»

View All Photos »»

Filed under: Josh Kelley,Katherine Heigl,Naleigh Kelley

Photo credit: Splash

24 Comments »»

Post a Comment

  1. SarahSarah

    Agree. “Adopted” is not necessary. She is her daughter. Period

    Reply
  2. Anabelle

    This poor kid only ever seems to be with the nanny at the moment. It’s kind of sad. x

    Reply
    • Anonymous

      I do believe Katherine is filming the movie “Face Blind” right now so that could be why her daughter is with the nanny lately.

      Reply
    • Anonymous

      No, what’s sad is that a pack of grown men are benefitting financially from following and papping a toddler & her nanny!! Where’s the celebrity here, I don’t see one.

      Reply
  3. Anonymous

    That first sentence should just read “Naleigh Kelly, the daughter of…”

    There’s no need to include “adopted”…you wouldn’t say “biological daughter” would you? No. A daughter is a daughter, period. Doesn’t matter how the family came to be.

    Reply
    • Rosy

      This website is really weird for commenting on the ‘adopted’ status of peoples children. For example, you hardly ever see them say that Hugh Jackman’s children are adopted, but with other peoples kids they always mention it. Not sure why exactly.

      Reply
      • Anonymous

        I agree. If if they want to always label this child as adopted, they shouldn’t they also write things like, “Ben Affleck and his biological daughter” or “Hilary Duff and her biological son”?

        Stupid.

        Reply
  4. Eva

    Why do you feel it is necessary to say “adopted” daughter? Do you think that is somehow less “real” than any other kind? Doubt her parents think that.

    Reply
    • Joy

      i agree anonymous and eva. what was the point of saying she is adopted? besides, if you didn’t know you would one you looked at the photographs.

      Reply
    • Joy

      i agree anonymous and eva. what was the point of saying she is adopted? besides, if you didn’t know you would one you looked at the photographs.

      Reply
  5. Anonymous

    Her mother is the “celebrity” – why are these paps stalking this child and her nanny??? Seriously….

    Reply
  6. Ondine

    CBS should know better than to use a phrase like “adopted daughter.” It’s very prejudicial and isolating and an unnecessary label that shouldn’t follow this little girl or any adopted child. Adopted children are real children in real families. Only unthinking outsiders would thoughtlessly and consistently refer to a child’s adoption status, even years after the fact. Believe me, by now thanks to the efforts to CBS, we all know this is an adopted child. You don’t need to keep minding us each time you publish her photo.

    Reply
  7. Clare

    Look at her chubby little arms, so cute

    Reply
  8. Anonymous

    CBS — As someone already said, there’s no celebrity in these pictures, just a toddler and her nanny. Why buy them – you are just encouraging these predators to stalk children. I suppose it makes sense when she is with her mother as there is an interest in her for her acting work – but outside that context….????????????Come on.

    Reply
  9. Anonymous

    If you want them to stop saying things like adopted daughter or even follow this poor child then stop coming to this site or following celebrities. You are here because you are interested. You’re interest is the reason these papps keep making money following people. Would you like being followed. Probably not

    Reply
  10. Anonymous9

    The nanny should start looking for a new job; KH is the type who fires the nanny when the kid gets too attached to her instead of realizing that it’s perfectly natural for the kid to be attached to the person actually raising her.

    Reply
  11. Lakesha

    I hope readers feel as strong about the parent child bond when the Jackson children are shown. Never heard this much support… There’s often a group insisting that Michael Jackson isn’t the children’s father.

    Reply
    • Anonymous

      That’s probably because he ISN’T the father.

      Reply
      • Ashley

        What’s WRONG with people like you? First of all, it has NEVER been proven that he wasn’t the father. He was their legal father, just as Katherine is legally Naliegh’s biological mother. Michael claimed his kids as his own, and who are we to say he lied? Just because they don’t fit the standard stereotypicial biracial profile that YOU want to peg them into it, that doesn’t mean they’re not. Now shut up about it. He WAS their father. Biological or not, it doesn’t matter, because he was the only one they called dad.

        Reply
        • Anonymous

          Ashley, for the life of me I can’t figure out why you get yourself so worked up every time someone mentions Michael Jackson and his kids. What do you care what some troll on the internet thinks? I’m sure his kids couldn’t care less what they (or you) think, so calm yourself down. You will never convince the trolls of anything.

          Reply
    • Ashley

      Isn’t it sad? I think people are just upset because he claimed them as his biological children, insisted that he used his own sperm cells. And who are we to say he didn’t? Even if he didn’t, it’s nobody’s business, and the media was always prying into his life. The kids clearly loved him, and he loved them, and barely anybody really knew what these kids looked like until he died, and now they’re splashed all over the Internet, thousands of pictures of them, people scrutinizing their looks each time a new post about them is up. It’s sad and sick.

      The fact is that he was their father, and that parent child bond is JUST as strong for Michael Jackson and his kids.

      Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>