Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Judge has denied Britney Spears’s request!

214 replies

PoisionIvy22 · 01/07/2021 07:29

....AIBU to think WTF?!

What is actually going to her? I feel so sad waking up to that news this morning. Is the judge on the payroll too or something? It’s just awful Sad

Any judges here that can shed any light on why she can’t be free to live her life?

OP posts:
HeronLanyon · 01/07/2021 07:54

I thought it was odd that the request was based on no medical/expert assessment of her. I wonder if this is the stumbling block and whether there is nothing to stop a similar application but to agree to expert reports ??
Wonder if the judge gave any indications in judgment (if has been handed down) of next steps.

Woeismethischristmas · 01/07/2021 07:54

I’m not going to pretend I know a lot about this but it seems reasonable for there to be a court appointed conservator if it’s still considered necessary rather than her father. She’s said she is afraid of him. I don’t see how the situation can do anything but exacerbate any mental health issues or stress she may be suffering.

SpindleWhorl · 01/07/2021 07:56

I honestly couldn't go and watch her perform now, knowing she's being used like this, performing so unhappily, against her will.

And she needs a better lawyer.

The more I read the more it seems that the case presented to the judge was a mess, despite Britney Spears's powerful testimony.

Bluntness100 · 01/07/2021 07:56

Well of course no one understands it, the vast majority of the information on this is sealed and the public are not being told. Clearly for her own privacy.

Dozer · 01/07/2021 07:56

I don’t understand the law around this. Presume it comes down to whether a person is deemed by health professionals and a judge to have significantly impaired capacity to take decisions etc. Eg Britney wishes to marry (huge financial implications) and have more DC.

It seems v odd that someone could perform and be on TV so successfully, over a long period of time, whilst at the same time being deemed so impaired as to be unable to manage their life etc.

Yugi · 01/07/2021 07:57

It was denied without prejudice which usually means it was denied on a technicality and this decision shouldn’t affect any future applications.

Whinge · 01/07/2021 07:58

I worry things will change for the worse. I imagine her father is royally pissed off she has dared to challenge him like this and he still start dictating even more. Increasing meds, increasing workload… I wouldn’t be surprise if she attempts suicide soon, she can’t live like this it’s heartbreaking.

I think that's a definite concern. I worry we'll wake up one morning to such a headline, and it will be too late. Sad

OrrisRoot · 01/07/2021 07:59

@Bluntness100

Well of course no one understands it, the vast majority of the information on this is sealed and the public are not being told. Clearly for her own privacy.
She’s an example of a widely applicable law, though. The court doesn’t disclose confidential information, of course. The “state” does need to explain its general workings to the citizenry, when there is such widespread unease about an issue.
OrrisRoot · 01/07/2021 08:00

I think that's a definite concern. I worry we'll wake up one morning to such a headline, and it will be too late.

I can’t imagine being the boyfriend in this scenario. He seems to be functioning as a one-man life-support system. Hopefully a benign one.

Bluntness100 · 01/07/2021 08:00

She’s an example of a widely applicable law, though. The court doesn’t disclose confidential information, of course. The “state” does need to explain its general workings to the citizenry, when there is such widespread unease about an issue

No it doesn’t. She is entitled to her privacy. Your or anyone else’s desire to know doesn’t trump that.

romdowa · 01/07/2021 08:02

I'm going to hazard a guess that it was denied because she hasn't been reassessed and the judge probably has to base their decision on previous assessments. I suppose the fact that Brittany is refusing to be assessed plays right into her fathers narrative that she isn't capable of making sound decisions.

HOkieCOkie · 01/07/2021 08:02

It’s hard to judge from an outsider point of view. I have a relative who is making choices that are harming themselves mentally etc they don’t see that they have an issue. They come across as a healthy individual to outsiders. But we know there is a lot more to it.

I don’t know Britney but I’m guessing she’s got a lot of issues we don’t know about etc

Rosesareyellow · 01/07/2021 08:03

It doesn’t seem right but I think there must be a lot more to it all than the public knows. We don’t know how severe her mental health issues really are and what has been happening behind closed doors. But it seems clear as day that the people around her are not providing her with the support she needs to really get better and I don’t think they want her to get any better as it’s all worked out much too well for them, particularly her father.

Reallyreallyborednow · 01/07/2021 08:03

Do we have anything similar to conservatorship in the uk? Power of attorney, but that is if medical professionals deem you incapable of making decisions..

Surely a comprehensive MH assessment will deem her competent or not? Why isn’t it that simple?

OrrisRoot · 01/07/2021 08:04

@Bluntness100

She’s an example of a widely applicable law, though. The court doesn’t disclose confidential information, of course. The “state” does need to explain its general workings to the citizenry, when there is such widespread unease about an issue

No it doesn’t. She is entitled to her privacy. Your or anyone else’s desire to know doesn’t trump that.

I allowed that I don’t expect them to release the details of individual rulings, medical records and so on.

However, it’s a situation in which the judiciary and the law itself is under intense public criticism and, in that scenario, I’m surprised that the applicable communications team haven’t addressed general concern around conservatorships as a whole before this judgement was given. Something like that.

Whinge · 01/07/2021 08:04

No it doesn’t. She is entitled to her privacy.

If this was about her privacy surely those involved would be keeping her out of the limelight? By keeping her in the public eye with shows and concerts yet still under such a strict conservatorship, they're almost inviting speculation into her private life.

butterpuffed · 01/07/2021 08:04

Where is her mother in all of this, does she have a say ? Is she still with the father ?

Twickytwo · 01/07/2021 08:05

The day of the court hearing, the BBC on the Today programme reported that she supposedly had a diagnosis of early onset dementia. This would mean that she progressively worsened and, I think, could be affected by a pregnancy. I agree about changing the Guardianship though.

OneMoreHobnobPlease · 01/07/2021 08:06

@PatchyTwat

There is no justification at all.

She’s got to be in this state partly due to upbringing and being used as a child, if she needs a conservatorship then it should be someone independent the court appoints. This is absolutely cruel.

If she can be used again to work and do shows and make more money they she can’t possibly be too mentally ill to make some independent decisions. She’s not a fucking pet.

YES!! I'm so angry.
DrSbaitso · 01/07/2021 08:08

@Bluntness100

She’s an example of a widely applicable law, though. The court doesn’t disclose confidential information, of course. The “state” does need to explain its general workings to the citizenry, when there is such widespread unease about an issue

No it doesn’t. She is entitled to her privacy. Your or anyone else’s desire to know doesn’t trump that.

A nation is entitled to know under what terms its citizens may be held under the control of someone else even when they are compos mentis enough to understand what is happening, oppose it and request changes.
U2HasTheEdge · 01/07/2021 08:08

@Woeismethischristmas

I’m not going to pretend I know a lot about this but it seems reasonable for there to be a court appointed conservator if it’s still considered necessary rather than her father. She’s said she is afraid of him. I don’t see how the situation can do anything but exacerbate any mental health issues or stress she may be suffering.
Exactly.

It is not in her best interests to have a conservator who she feels scared of and does not want. If, and it is a big if, she does need this conservatorship she should have a say in who is not a part of it.

SofiaAmes · 01/07/2021 08:09

I have been a volunteer (unpaid) conservator of a mentally ill teenager and been in that very same conservatorship court many many times albeit with a different judge. They don't keep conservatorships for any but the most severely mentally ill who are a danger to themselves or others. I've seen them release all sorts. The only person I saw who wasn't released was a woman who thought that she wouldn't need money to survive and that her food was going to come "raining from the sky like manna from heaven" and god was going to provide her a place to live.
In every case that I observed, the judge carefully and directly questioned the conservatee regarding their wishes to remain in the conservatorship and asked the conservator regarding their opinion on the matter AND quite often a psychological evaluation was mandated to happen before any decisions could be made. AND the conservatee is always offered a jury trial if they are unhappy with the judge's decision. My conservatee was developmentally delayed and severely mentally ill and told the judge that she wanted to "find a boyfriend on the internet and have babies" and I think that the judge still would have released her if she hadn't voluntarily agreed to remain in the conservatorship as she couldn't get into the public housing and school that she wanted unless she remained conserved. From my experience, I find it hard to believe that the judge would have continued the conservatorship if Britney hadn't in some way agreed to it.

Britney's father hasn't been her conservator of the person for several years which means he would have nothing to do with the birth control issue. My guess is that there is a concern about her becoming pregnant while taking the psychotropics she needs for her bipolar. But having said that, the private conservatorship route is a money sink and it does sound like they are frittering away Britney's fortune.

vivainsomnia · 01/07/2021 08:13

So ignore my earlier comment about why the judge has denied. There isn’t any justification IMO
Yes we shall trust your judgement as you must have in depth expertise on mental health and legal matters associated to them and judges are clearly ignorant in spite of their long education and career!

shouldistop · 01/07/2021 08:13

Any judges here that can shed any light on why she can’t be free to live her life?

No judge would give their opinion on social media, even anonymously, without having all of the information that the deciding judge has access to.

Upamountain43 · 01/07/2021 08:13

I do not know the USA system but as someone who works in this field in the UK its seems crazy.

I have definitely come across issues with Power of Attorneys acting against the persons best interests but where an individual is objecting to any restrictions on them the Court allocates independent assessors and ongoing monitoring. I doubt she would be in this situation in the UK. At the very least the Court would allocate an independent person to manage her affairs if she objected this much - no matter her diagnosis or level of capacity.