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?

variety.com/2021/music/news/britney-spears-full-statement-conservatorship-1235003940/

The full transcript. I actually agree with her this conservatorship is abusive. She can’t do anything for herself yet they work her to exhaustion. Evil people.

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

This. Her father is clearly an inappropriate person to hold this position.

@UhtredRagnarson

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

This. Her father is clearly an inappropriate person to hold this position.

I agree with this ^ it should be an independent team. Her family are leeching off her so it’s no wonder they’re clinging onto the conservatorship.

The annoying thing is the press never reported on all of this, it was fans who started the freebritney movement so it’s hard to find “legit” articles about the evidence and information that fans have found out.

Courtney love has spoken out about it twitter.com/brunolovesbrit/status/1288228867224854534?s=21 and www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.unilad.co.uk/celebrity/courtney-love-says-britney-spears-manager-almost-killed-her-and-kurt-cobains-daughter/amp/. I was surprised this wasn’t covered on the recent documentaries made but maybe it will be on the new Netflix one.

I have seen paperwork on twitter which suggests that Britney’s Instagram account is officially owned by the conservatorship and fans seem to know the name of the social media manager, the Instagram account seems to be designed to damage britney’s credibility. Again this is all so hard to find, I mainly see stuff on twitter from fans and it’s hard to tell what is legit… for example emails from Britney’s attorney asking what her budget is for holidays this year, shes worth how much? The leaked voicemail from a paralegal who worked on Britney’s case. All on twitter but nowhere “proper” ifkwim.

There’s also the point that Britney’s estate is estimated to be worth $60 million, which hasn’t changed during the course of the conservatorship despite the albums, tours, residencies, her perfume empire….

A conservatorship is the American equivalent of a deprutyship or an LPA when someone has lost capacity. As much as I’m sure Britney needs therapy I struggle to see how a conservatorship could be in her best interests. It wouldn’t surprise me if shes got ptsd from her experience in the conservatorship!

I struggle with the thought of allowing people to self-destruct and refusing to intervene but I don't think that it what is happening here.

She clearly became very unwell after the birth of her two sons, only a year apart, and the breakdown of her marriage. And I think the impact of such massive fame and scrutiny from such a young age will seriously affect a lot of people.

I've no idea if the conservatorship were appropriate to begin with, but 13 years later- really? When she has been releasing albums/performing/touring? I don't buy for a second that she would have been able to do those things if she were that incapable. Not at the level she was doing them. What I do think is that it's disgraceful that her family and those around her were pushing her into work that she clearly didn't want to do.

I think the way she has been treated is likely to have exacerbated any problems she were having. I don't think there needs to be such a level of control over her life- she really does not appear to be incapable. She needs good drs and therapists, she needs to be respected- she said about wanting to have therapy at home and this wasn't even allowed? She doesn't want constant therapy- she has said she wants to see her therapist once a week in her own home. This doesn't sound like someone who is unwilling to engage with people who would actually be trying to help them.

She shouldn't be working if she doesn't want to. She shouldn't be forced to have an IUD if she doesn't want one. She needs respect and care and privacy- and people who actually have her interests at heart. Unbelievable that this isn't her own parents- they are despicable. She clearly needs support and shouldn't be left to it but this conservatorship isn't proportionate and the people who are currently treating her as a cash cow need to be kept away from her and have no say in her life.

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

I struggle with the thought of allowing people to self-destruct and refusing to intervene but I don't think that it what is happening here.

She clearly became very unwell after the birth of her two sons, only a year apart, and the breakdown of her marriage. And I think the impact of such massive fame and scrutiny from such a young age will seriously affect a lot of people.

I've no idea if the conservatorship were appropriate to begin with, but 13 years later- really? When she has been releasing albums/performing/touring? I don't buy for a second that she would have been able to do those things if she were that incapable. Not at the level she was doing them. What I do think is that it's disgraceful that her family and those around her were pushing her into work that she clearly didn't want to do.

I think the way she has been treated is likely to have exacerbated any problems she were having. I don't think there needs to be such a level of control over her life- she really does not appear to be incapable. She needs good drs and therapists, she needs to be respected- she said about wanting to have therapy at home and this wasn't even allowed? She doesn't want constant therapy- she has said she wants to see her therapist once a week in her own home. This doesn't sound like someone who is unwilling to engage with people who would actually be trying to help them.

She shouldn't be working if she doesn't want to. She shouldn't be forced to have an IUD if she doesn't want one. She needs respect and care and privacy- and people who actually have her interests at heart. Unbelievable that this isn't her own parents- they are despicable. She clearly needs support and shouldn't be left to it but this conservatorship isn't proportionate and the people who are currently treating her as a cash cow need to be kept away from her and have no say in her life.

Absolutely agree, that was hard to listen too, you can hear the anger in Britney's voice, this is just shocking.

As someone who went through this on a much lower level I have to say that the destruction to someones life from taking away freedom and risk of death can be equal to if not more than the mental health illness in the first place.

I am pretty sure 9/10 people would have committed suicide in Britney's position. She is one tough cookie to have gone through this and still be here.

So I dont think 'protecting people from harm' is as black and white as people think it is.

Thank you @UhtredRagnarson

I am healed from it now thankfully and no relapses. I see it as a blip in life and one I learned a great deal from. I hope Britney can have the same.

It's horrifying. And things like lack of bodily autonomy, control over reproduction, lack of ownership of money, are all ways women have been controlled forever. Are there any equivalent UK measures that could be exploited in this way?

@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.

Can you tell me on what basis you think it is right that she should be denied her own legal representation? Or worse still, that her father is allowed to chose who represents her? Regardless of how ill she is or isn't - and we have her Dad's view on that - basic fundamental rights have been removed from her. By her dad. Who she has to pay for.

It's disgusting.

I actually find it really offensive that some people seem to be suggesting that episodes of mental ill health mean a person is incapable of making decisions over a decade later. This sort of thinking is a slippery slope to suggesting those with mental health conditions are simply incapable of ever making decisions. A so-called meltdown 13 years ago does not mean that Britney's mental health has stayed static since. Likewise, the suggestion that someone with a mental health condition should not have full bodily autonomy is abhorrent.

Clearly Britney has previously been diagnosed with specific conditions and has also faced an experience she finds incredibly traumatic. Surely the right thing to do here is for a completely independent medical team to assess her mental and physical needs? So much of this rests on whether or not she has the capacity to look after herself, and yet it seems as if she has never had the opportunity to be assessed entirely independent of her family.

LemonSwan glad that you are well now. I agree with you- I was thinking myself how strong she must be to have gone through all she has.

@mummymathsteacher

I actually find it really offensive that some people seem to be suggesting that episodes of mental ill health mean a person is incapable of making decisions over a decade later. This sort of thinking is a slippery slope to suggesting those with mental health conditions are simply incapable of ever making decisions. A so-called meltdown 13 years ago does not mean that Britney's mental health has stayed static since. Likewise, the suggestion that someone with a mental health condition should not have full bodily autonomy is abhorrent.

Clearly Britney has previously been diagnosed with specific conditions and has also faced an experience she finds incredibly traumatic. Surely the right thing to do here is for a completely independent medical team to assess her mental and physical needs? So much of this rests on whether or not she has the capacity to look after herself, and yet it seems as if she has never had the opportunity to be assessed entirely independent of her family.

I 100% agree. Do we lock up everyone diagnosed with bipolar or depression? Do we lock up people with dementia? No we don't and for good reason. Jesus, the state of some people on here.

I don't understand this at all. Plenty of mentally ill women continue to have babies that are taken away from them at birth. Not saying I agree (I don't) but why the double standard here?

Has she ever been seen by a doctor who isn't appointed by her father?

@mummymathsteacher

I actually find it really offensive that some people seem to be suggesting that episodes of mental ill health mean a person is incapable of making decisions over a decade later. This sort of thinking is a slippery slope to suggesting those with mental health conditions are simply incapable of ever making decisions. A so-called meltdown 13 years ago does not mean that Britney's mental health has stayed static since. Likewise, the suggestion that someone with a mental health condition should not have full bodily autonomy is abhorrent.

Clearly Britney has previously been diagnosed with specific conditions and has also faced an experience she finds incredibly traumatic. Surely the right thing to do here is for a completely independent medical team to assess her mental and physical needs? So much of this rests on whether or not she has the capacity to look after herself, and yet it seems as if she has never had the opportunity to be assessed entirely independent of her family.

Agree with this massively.

An episode of mental illness does not justify controlling someone's life and removing their bodily autonomy for over a decade.

If I remember correctly I saw something that showed that there is a lot of money to be made in these sorts of arrangements, and there's whole firms who can milk those under these sorts of orders for all the cash they've got, remove property, pay themselves huge salaries, put people into low quality care facilities, etc. I think there was going to be a netflix documentary about how this system and how children were having to fight the system to get their parents freed, whilst those running the orders were getting rich from having them in place.
Even beyond Britney, these arrangements sound hugely exploitative.

Can you tell me on what basis you think it is right that she should be denied her own legal representation? Or worse still, that her father is allowed to chose who represents her?

This confuses me. If she doesn’t have capacity then she is essentially a child in law so the state should appoint her a lawyer that is impartial and represent her interests like they do with child protection cases? The parents of the child don’t get to choose who represents the child.

The conservatorship was granted because back in 2008 Britney's Dad claimed that she was diagnosed with early onset dementia. Whether that is true or just a convenient lie that would ensure the shocking level of control that he has been granted over her and her money is unknown.

The problem is she has to prove that she's mentally competent, when her behaviour in the past, even when relatively well, was erratic and unpredictable - whirlwind romances, spontaneous marriages - remember her 48-hour marriage in Vegas that had to be annulled, nefarious men to call themselves her manager and thereby getting control of her and her money (remember Sam Lutfi?), the crazy relationship she had with various paparazzi who made her life hell, her very public breakdown, it went on and on.

What the real story is behind all this is and how well/unwell she really is, is unknown. As a PP said, it's really hard to prove that you're sane when all around you say you're not. Equally, a seriously unwell person can present as quite sane when properly medicated. So what's the truth?

@mummymathsteacher

I actually find it really offensive that some people seem to be suggesting that episodes of mental ill health mean a person is incapable of making decisions over a decade later. This sort of thinking is a slippery slope to suggesting those with mental health conditions are simply incapable of ever making decisions. A so-called meltdown 13 years ago does not mean that Britney's mental health has stayed static since. Likewise, the suggestion that someone with a mental health condition should not have full bodily autonomy is abhorrent.

Clearly Britney has previously been diagnosed with specific conditions and has also faced an experience she finds incredibly traumatic. Surely the right thing to do here is for a completely independent medical team to assess her mental and physical needs? So much of this rests on whether or not she has the capacity to look after herself, and yet it seems as if she has never had the opportunity to be assessed entirely independent of her family.

100%. Britney can't apparently make the most basic of decisions but she can hold down a residency in Vegas? Come on. She clearly has issues but this conservatorship has probably made her worse, not better.

She is a cash cow for her family and it suits them (her dad) to keep her like this. Everyone and their dog profiting from her money that she's earned and she doesn't even get to choose her own legal counsel!

Her Instagram is a bit disturbing but I'm not even sure she controls that but to be fair she can't do much else but spin about all day no doubt under various medication she probably no longer needs but is made to take.

And yes this would no way happen if she were a man.

@LolaSmiles

An episode of mental illness does not justify controlling someone's life and removing their bodily autonomy for over a decade.

If I remember correctly I saw something that showed that there is a lot of money to be made in these sorts of arrangements, and there's whole firms who can milk those under these sorts of orders for all the cash they've got, remove property, pay themselves huge salaries, put people into low quality care facilities, etc. I think there was going to be a netflix documentary about how this system and how children were having to fight the system to get their parents freed, whilst those running the orders were getting rich from having them in place.
Even beyond Britney, these arrangements sound hugely exploitative.

Her Dad earns $16,000 a month for his "work" in controlling his daughter's life. And she is allowed $2000 a month.

The IUD is supposed to stop her having any more children that she can’t look after,

Some of the messages used to treat BPD/psychosis are toxic to a foetus so it may not be about controlling her, but about preventing suffering/harm to any child

She would need to be off meds to have it removed and being off meds may not be safe for her.

Some of these conditions are really complex, manageable on meds but dangerous unmedicated and the sufferer can't always judge if being off their medication is safe for them.

People can be stable for years, hold down jobs, have relationships and then suddenly spiral out of control. And unfortunately sometimes a symptom of that spiral is paranoia so the sufferer insists they don't need medicating and people who say they do are trying to harm them.

I really feel for Britney but I think the whole situation is far too complex to understand from where we all are. I'm glad a judge is looking at it.

It's horrifying. That a woman can have a mental breakdown and that be used as an excuse more than a decade later for her not to be allowed have control over her own body and own financial affairs. And yet she was apparently well enough to be sent out to work and keeping laying those golden eggs. How does that add up?

It's so ableist to think that someone who struggled with their mental health at one point in their health should be forced to surrender all their rights decades later. Ableism, misogyny and greed is what this all boils down to.

Even if she has "paranoia", some of her requests (like wanting therapy in her house rather than being sent to somewhere that paparazzi can get to her) are totally fine. Why would they not just allow that?

I don't think anyone would disagree that Britney had a period when she was very unwell indeed.

But since then - does anyone actually know her current psychiatric state of mind?

If she had early onset dementia as had been claimed, there would be signs of deterioration 13 years later but there are none. As many have said, this claim appears to be entirely fictitious.

I came here to say similar to @mummymathsteacher - it's utterly unacceptable to suggest that because someone had a period of mental illness that it's perfectly OK to accept that they must be controlled forever. Lots of people go through a very difficult time with their mental health - many recover sufficiently to be suitably functional. It's shocking to think that having a period of psychosis dooms you forever.

And I think what concerns me is even if the conservator is removed, how on earth would she cope suddenly having all that autonomy? She's lurched from severe mental illness to the trauma of being effectively kept prisoner for 13 years. She's going to need a lot of support to transition successfully if the conservatorship is removed.

And it may well be that she relapses in the future - that still doesn't mean it's wrong to remove it now.

I understand that it's an emotive subject but there's currently nothing to suggest that she's mentally unwell right now - and certainly not to the extent to require a conservator. Managing a mental health condition and taking medication is not a reason to maintain the conservator. We don't keep people who are well and functioning locked up in a mental health ward just in case they get sick again - that's effectively what's happening here.

And I hate to bang the drum and blame it on sexism, but I absolutely believe that her cultivated image as a cutesy girl played a part in all of this. I don't think this degree of control would ever be leveraged over a man, or possibly even a woman who's viewed as more mature/strong.