Britney Spears and Conservatorships

[WotgunShedding]

This is horrifying. She’s asking for a judge to reconsider the conservatorship and the details of how little autonomy she has is awful.

“I have an IUD in my body right now that won’t let me have a baby and my conservators won’t let me go to the doctor to take it out.”

How is this allowed?

Sadly when someone’s very mentally ill the fact they don’t want the level of protection they have in place, does not mean it’s the right, humane, kind, or even decent thing to do to remove it.

Agreed but if she were 'very mentally ill' then why was she forced to work- the Vegas residency, world tour?

I think it's likely she does need medication/therapy etc, but what is currently in place doesn't seem to be proportionate, or helping her and is likely to be making her more unwell.

@Bluntness100

I think people have to remember that it’s no secret Britney feels like this, but the conservatoire is in place for her own protection. She’s stating she doesn’t wish more evaluations, but is that in her best interests.

When someone is very ill then sectioning them for their own self protection is in their best interests, even if the person doesn’t wish it and many people are unable to ever function properly. Britney is also at more of a risk than others, becayse she’s a target for thos who will exploit her.

People need to stop assuming that because she doesn’t wish this that this is in her best interests for her not to have it and that without it, something very very bad might happen to her and very very quickly.

What needs to happen now is her not wanting it needs to be balanced against why it’s in place, the risks she faces and how able she is to function.

Her previous behaviour, prior to the conservatoire being in place shows that she is not taking her medication reliably, it seems she’s, amongst other things, manic depressive/BI polar, and her estate was in debt, so clearly the statements made about her being exploited due to her vulnerability will be correct, she’s also unable to look after th kids she has, would another one really be a good idea? It’s highly unlikely she’d be able to look after a new child.

Sadly when someone’s very mentally ill the fact they don’t want the level of protection they have in place, does not mean it’s the right, humane, kind, or even decent thing to do to remove it.

The only legally enforced state intervention is that the injection of meds can be court mandated in patients who refuse to take it (usually due to their illness ie thinking they are poison and a way for the government to control them etc). I would be interested to know how many people are granted conservatorieships yet are permitted and encouraged to still work. Surely that's a bit of a contradiction, you are incapable of navigating daily life yet you can work in an industry that causes a lot of struggles and stresses and leaves you open to judgement from the world; wouldn't you want to protect someone? He says well she enjoys it, I'm sure there are lots of things she would enjoy. She has done interviews where she is coherent, at what point is it up to her to make her own decisions, even if they're bad? I could see if the battle was around her capability to look after her children who are a priority, but to look after herself is a scary concept imo.

The whole story sickens me, as PPs have said, how can she be ill enough to need this level of controlling for years yet still be fine to go on tours? And it's impossible to say without knowing all the details whether she should have the conservatorship in place or not but what would be the harm in letting her choose/change who is in charge of that (within reason)? And why is the conservatorship so wide ranging that they literally control her life, is there a single male celebrity that's every had anything near this?

Surely she has enough money to live entirely out of the public eye, on some farm miles from any where, where she can focus on herself for once in her life. Also looking at recent footage I suspect there has been some Botox and fillers, she doesn’t have body autonomy so who is deciding that she needs that? And what she needs to look like?
And most importantly she is on contraception which she doesn’t want, but who is she having sex with? She cant buy a coffee without her dads say so, who is he allowing to have sex with a women who’s life he has complete control over? Call me cynical but I can’t think of a few situations there.

She’s lost custody of her kids multiple times and has been paying about £60k per month in child support to her ex. The IUD is supposed to stop her having any more children that she can’t look after, because she’s a target for men who want an easy ride by getting her pregnant then claiming custody and huge amounts of child support. I’m not saying it’s right but that’s the reason.

It does if she's being forced to take her meds. I know people on my own family who have become very seriously mentally ill, and if they do not take their drugs they become entirely different people. Capable of self harm, being violent, and making erratic decisions that put themselves and others in real danger. But they seem almost well (if you don't know any better) and capable when they take them regularly.

No, it’s still doesn’t. If she is ill enough without meds that she has to be forced to take them then she is not well enough to be working like she was. No way.

I think what’s clear no matter what is that if a conservatorship is necessary, it absolutely shouldn’t be her father who holds it.

[thank] @LemonSwan I’m glad you found the strength to speak for yourself and start to heal.

That should have been

@Tuberoses I know she’s lost custody of her kids, and certainly isn’t in a position to look after a baby. But who is going to get her pregnant. Her dad has the power to stop her seeing anyone at all, to move her to a different location completely against her will. That power over her should prevent anyone at all having sex with her. If she isn’t allowed to be anywhere alone.

Her previous behaviour, prior to the conservatoire being in place shows that she is not taking her medication reliably,

was not taking her medication reliably. That’s not a permanent situation that should be used to control her life forever.

Full audio of her testimony here: m.youtube.com/watch?v=iVrhKBhMrEI

she’s also unable to look after th kids she has, would another one really be a good idea? It’s highly unlikely she’d be able to look after a new child.

Do they insert things into very mentally ill men’s testicles to prevent them creating more children?

And most importantly she is on contraception which she doesn’t want, but who is she having sex with? She cant buy a coffee without her dads say so, who is he allowing to have sex with a women who’s life he has complete control over?

Very good point. If she is so ill that she needs someone else to decide she must have contraception then she is too ill to consent to sex.

@UhtredRagnarson

she’s also unable to look after th kids she has, would another one really be a good idea? It’s highly unlikely she’d be able to look after a new child.

Do they insert things into very mentally ill men’s testicles to prevent them creating more children?

No but just like women they stop them looking after the kids if they are unable.

Look there is two sides to this. It’s a moral dilemma

So if someone is at significant risk of harm is it right to protect them Ie sectioned, conservatoire etc for their own protection when it’s against their will , when it’s recognised they do not understand the risks they are putting themselves under by that request? Or should we just say ok and let that harm befall them.

How many desperate relatives have we seen on here, wishing someone helped against their will for their own protection.

So the moral dilemma is, if it’s recognised Britney or others like her, do not understand the ramifications of their requests and the terrible harm that can befall them if their requests are granted, should society protect them against their will or just let them go and take what they have coming to them?

That’s really the moral dilemma here. As a parent it would be a very difficult thing to deliberately let your child suffer because they are too ill to know the ramifications of what they are requesting. The parental instinct is to protect. Should society ignore the parental instinct and just let these people do as they wish ans suffer extraordinary harm, if not death because of it?

No but just like women they stop them looking after the kids if they are unable.

So not quite just like women.

@UhtredRagnarson

No but just like women they stop them looking after the kids if they are unable.

So not quite just like women.

Not in terms of contraception no. Because for men it would involve castration.

Sorry that should have said vasectomy, but permanent, as there is no form of reliable contraception for men other than condoms.

I find this all horrifying. One her children has a restraining order against her father because hex’s been violent… how can that make him an appropriate conservator?

Britney clearly had a breakdown and needed psychiatric help but did not need to have her freedom taken from her. One of the managers allegedly tried to get Amanda bynes, Lindsay Lohan and Courtney love in the same type of conservatorship.

Thing is you can have a breakdown, have drug problems, make bad decisions and still go on to live your life. Other celebrities check in to rehab… if she is so unwell she cannot make decisions for herself then she should not have been releasing studio albums and doing world tours. Shes managed to work for 13 years under this conservatorsip- learn choreography, perform, record albums etc. I think her team have said indicated she has dementia- this seems unlikely. Anyway I think there’s a free Britney website that has a lot of the information on there..

I don’t think anyone is suggesting Britney Spears should be left to her own devices. It’s clear she isn’t a well woman who needs a great deal of support. What’s in question is whether the current arrangements are in her best interests. or someone else’s it’s right to continually assess the level of intervention she has and whether it’s still necessary or whether it can be adjusted. We don’t just diagnose someone and leave them with the first medication they’re given for the rest of their life, we review them regularly to make sure it’s still appropriate for them.

@Bluntness100

Sorry that should have said vasectomy, but permanent, as there is no form of reliable contraception for men other than condoms.

Oh I’m sure there are. The great minds of this world have been capable off creating all sorts of inventions. A male contraceptive exists.

I’ve just listened to that full testimony and quite honestly I feel close to tears. The poor woman. Surely, this now can’t be legal. She needs total freedom with the right therapy for the trauma she has been through and if any legal restrictions apply, it should be a restraining order against the manipulative exploitative members of her ‘family’

You can even hear her voice is so different when she is speaking authentically.

She has a boyfriend who she wants to marry and have children with. I think her dad is allowing the relationship but not taking it any further than that.

The sleaze she hooked up with during her breakdown did seem to be trying to knock her up so in a way yes it's for her own protection. But it still should not be allowed, it's akin to forcible sterilisation.

I imagine if she had proper support and not just control, she could manage another child.

One of the managers allegedly tried to get Amanda bynes, Lindsay Lohan and Courtney love in the same type of conservatorship.

One wonders why four women under the same management all developed mental health and drug abuse problems…

I think if she had retired from the public eye and gone to live a quiet private life somewhere far away from prying eyes with her dad who never took a penny for controlling her affairs, I would be a bit more convinced of the need for the conservatoire.

But instead she appears to be well enough to work and work and work in a role that it very stressful and public. And her dad is getting rich off it all.

Her mental health is undoubtedly terrible but she has spent 12 years as a slave - my mental health would be terrible in that circumstance too.

She needs advisers and people to support her - but they need to be people who are not getting rich off the back of her - probably professionals who are paid a fair rate for their work but only at the same level as they can - and normally do - earn from other clients. People who don’t see her as a golden slave but instead as a normal client who they do their best for then wave goodbye when they are no longer needed.

I think the conservatorship and custody arrangements are regularly reviewed by a judge and have been kept in place?

Like @Bluntness100 I also struggle with the idea of letting people make their own way even if it's really self-destructive. That's basically what was done with Amy Winehouse, that ended in tragedy. Lots of other young women in the business have suffered incredibly too.

I have a friend currently off his meds in a bipolar episode and he is literally wrecking everything in his life. He may come out the other side but he will have nothing left. It's very hard to watch and do nothing.

BUT I think it's possible to give Britney more freedom and still keep her safe. There should be an impartial conservator.