Why Nicole Kidman's Daughter is Snubbing Dad Keith Urban Amid 'Love Child' Scandal

Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban's eldest daughter has conspicuously left her father out of recent public praise, just as the country star is said to be quietly planning for another baby following their September split, according to a report.

Urban, 58, who shares teenagers Sunday Rose, 17, and Faith, 15, with Nicole Kidman, is reportedly 'very keen' to become a dad again even as he fends off renewed 'love child' allegations dating back three decades.

The former A‑list couple, both 58, separated last year after nearly two decades of marriage, with custody arrangements limiting Urban's in‑person time with Sunday and Faith to what one insider described as 59 days a year. The girls live primarily with Kidman, and the family has tried to project a relatively calm public front since the split.

Nicole Kidman, Keith Urban And A Quiet Snub From Their Daughter

The news came after Sunday gave an interview to Elle Australia in which she spoke glowingly about Nicole Kidman's influence, but, as noted by observers, made no mention of Keith Urban. In the celebrity‑industrial complex, omission can feel almost as pointed as criticism.

For a teenager whose every public word is managed and measured, leaving Dad out of the narrative is at the very least noticeable.

The insider, speaking to Star, suggested there is tension over Urban's priorities. While he remains a legal co‑parent, his stated desire to have another child appears to be landing badly with Sunday and Faith, who are still adjusting to the breakup.

'Keith is very keen to have another child,' adding that it was an ongoing discussion during the marriage. The pair, however, 'were never able to agree' on expanding their family, according to that same account.

None of the parties involved has publicly addressed the suggestion that Sunday's silence about her father in the interview was deliberate, and teenage daughters are not exactly famous for unbroken harmony with their parents. Still, against the backdrop of their parents' divorce and a highly public rumour mill, even a simple non‑mention has been seized upon as evidence of a snub.

'Love Child' Allegations Put Keith Urban Under Pressure

Urban's reported baby plans are colliding with a far older story he has been trying to outrun for years. The country singer is again facing long‑circulated claims that he fathered a secret child in 1994 while in a relationship with his then fiancée, Laura Sigler.

According to Star, two Australian women have alleged that their sister gave birth to Urban's baby and later placed the child for adoption. Urban has denied the claim. Those allegations have never been substantiated in public documents, and no independent evidence has been produced.

No paternity test results, no adoption records, no on‑the‑record statement from any alleged child are cited in the report. For now, it is an accusation that lives largely in the pages of celebrity weeklies. Nothing is confirmed yet, so everything should be taken with a grain of salt.

From a purely human standpoint, the timing could hardly be worse. On one side, a father carving out less than two months each year with his teenage daughters, whose loyalties and wounds are still in flux.

On the other hand, insiders are pushing the idea that he is already looking past this fragile moment to a brand‑new family chapter. Even if his motives are more benign than the gossip suggests, the optics are difficult to ignore.

For Kidman, who has spent much of her career maintaining a fiercely controlled personal brand, fresh headlines about a supposed 1990s 'love child' are unlikely to be welcome. Her silence so far looks less like indifference than a calculated decision not to add more oxygen to a story she cannot verify or effectively shut down.

Urban's camp has not issued a new formal statement on either the baby rumours or the latest paternity chatter since the Star piece. Without that, what remains is a patchwork of custody arrangements, teenage side‑eye and decades‑old allegations, stitched together by anonymous sources whose motivations are, as ever, opaque.