"Free Britney"

[CistitisStings]

Apologies if this has been covered already on this board.
Does anyone know much about "conservatorships", legally?
The fact that Britney Spears' actions have apparently been controlled by two men (her father and a lawyer, paid a lot from Britney's estate) for over a decade seems alarming.

I also agree about if her social media was as tightly controlled as people think then the colours thing would be picked up on. Because she has so many followers and has made some interesting choices in the past, it wouldn't be inconceivable that they are given the all clear before being posted; but it seems like an attention thing. The conservatorship is odd, but in America there are very different rules, she probably does benefit from some sort of control over her assets, but not to the extent that's being reported. There is a hearing or something soon I think, if nothing else it just proves how toxic fame is. I used to be a huge Britney fan, and I hope she is okay.

Yes, I'm a fan and I am 31, so most of her fans are probably early 30's.

Maybe a bit broader than that. I'm 36 and my friends are of the age that loved Britney too.

www.tmz.com/2020/07/17/britney-spears-conservatorship-jamie-free-movement-protests/

Hmm I just don't know what to think. She seems like she's not ok regardless.

She’s got a boyfriend who also posts on Instagram including her. Surly he would say something?

 Britney Spears asks court to end power father has held over her for 12 years news.sky.com/story/britney-spears-asks-court-to-end-her-fathers-12-year-long-control-over-her-12052084

It sounds like her father currently is not the conservator, and she wants the one who is currently doing the role to take over properly while she tries to get the whole arrangement overturned.

Its all gone quiet in the news.
Anyone know what the latest is?

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

Gosh that FB post is terrifying. If true it's almost a modern day slavery issue.

I'm sorry. first part of that FB post is utter bull (haven't read the rest so will come back if I'm wrong) Aguilera faced all of that, and Stripped was going to bomb until Beautiful. She didn't care. Was trashy on the red carpet but knew what she was. She's had songs that didn't chart or have done really badly. Britney ran with the money.

As another poster said, I’ve got much more sympathy for Kylie Moore Gilbert who’s currently entering her third year of a ten year sentence in Iran’s notorious Qarchak prison for some seemingly made up spy charge. The Australian/British governments seem not to be doing anything and she is being subjected to solitary confinement and beatings in a filthy disease riddled prison. I’m sure she’d change places with Britney.

@AdvicePleaseThankyou

Its all gone quiet in the news. Anyone know what the latest is?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-54897918

Britney has lost her court bid to have her father removed as conservator of her estate, but they've allowed financial company Bessemer Trust to become a co-conservator at Britney's request. The judge said she would consider future appeals for Jamie's removal, though.

Her lawyer said that Britney is afraid of her father and is refusing to perform/work again as long as he is in charge of her career, as they have no 'viable working relationship' and haven't even spoken in a long time. Jamie's lawyers argued that he's always acted in the best interests of his daughter and has done an exemplary job.

Her mum Lynne has described Britney's relationship with her dad as 'toxic' and said in a statement released through her lawyer that her daughter should not be forced to obey her father's demands.

According to news reports (Evening Standard) the judge said she will hear further evidence on Dec 16th as there was insufficient evidence presented at this time.

Britney father is clearly a controlling grifter.

Reports of $100 000 per month for him to control his daughter, compared to allowing her a few thousand a month.

Hopefully a lot is tied up in unlockable Trust Funds for her sons.

Looks like there's movement on this - though not that much. Father must just "share" the control with... a financial company.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56038523

Can you imagine this happening to a man?

I understand temporary control if someone has a period of mental illness (the equivalent of sectioning) or perhaps has been in a coercive relationship, but for it to remain in place for 12 years seems very wrong.

It's obvious the male mobs following her and harassing her could have easily sent her, or anyone, over the edge. There's plenty of footage where the Paparazzi are frustrating her, and she starts to lash out. But maybe she's afraid of being recorded throwing a fit, so she reels it in and tries to stay polite. Men following a woman around like this is stalking. Why should paparazzi get a pass?

Maybe she did have a mental illness (severe PND/PNS would be the obvious candidate).

But to be owned effectively by somebody else for all these years? That would send anybody into a state rather like a polar bear in a concrete enclosure. And, like anywhere else, an independent body should be responsible for her welfare.

wouldn't be surprised if Daddy's favourite is only so because pissing him off would only result in her being 'diagnosed' with the same condition

I have no idea if he father is abusing her monetarily, though that's always a risk in these arrangements.

But it is not at all unheard of for an adult to have one of these arrangements for a long period of time, and it isn' unusual that they might have a very negative view of the person in charge of their financial situation.

My mother has control of a trust for a relative who lacks capacity - it's very locked down and rather limited but nonetheless, that relative considers that my mother is purposefully screwing her over, and she has regularly called her up or written her pretty horrible abusive stuff. As a result they have to deal with each other with a go-between, they can't meet any more. It's all been pretty horrible for my mother.

The same issues that mean this relative doesn't have capacity are responsible for her outbursts, lack of self-control ,and inability to understand the situation. Maybe the paranoia as well. But of course he doesn't feel that way about it and would have a quite different description of the situation.

I have real doubts that the media involvement in this is helpful or appropriate.

@ChestnutStuffing, does your mum get to decide about details for your relative down to their relationships, work and day to day spending? And is your relative seemingly well enough to do lucrative international tours...?

I do generally agree about media involvement for individuals, @ChestnutStuffing, but I also think sometimes bad things happen which only public daylight can lead to change with. Don't know whether this is one of those examples, but it might be.

The problem is none of us have enough information to make any such determination, and not even a way to get it. Anything we can see, the courts can see as well.

A lot of the stuff in the media about this, like sending coded messages over instagram, has a conspiracy theory quality to it. What it looks like in a more straightforward interpretation is someone who is actually pretty out of it behaving in an abnormal way.

[quote JackNicholson]@ChestnutStuffing, does your mum get to decide about details for your relative down to their relationships, work and day to day spending? And is your relative seemingly well enough to do lucrative international tours...?[/quote]
And is there an independent body able to oversee your DM to ensure that she continues to act in your relative's best interests/their interests are protected, rather than exploited?

NeverDrop

I'm not sure, actually. I would think it's possible for the relative to dispute that things are being carried out as the trust intended but I don't know what that involves. It's not nearly as complete a level of control as a conservatorship, as that wouldn't make sense in their situation.

However, none of that is really to the point - which was it is not at all odd for a person in that kind of care arrangement to be unhappy about it, to think it is unnecessary, or to claim the person in charge is acting in bad faith. It's fairly common. A judge is not going to see that and automatically think there must be something dodgy - they see it all the time. People who have been put in an arrangement like that typically have significantly impaired judgement.

@NeverDropYourMoonCup

Maybe she did have a mental illness (severe PND/PNS would be the obvious candidate).

But to be owned effectively by somebody else for all these years? That would send anybody into a state rather like a polar bear in a concrete enclosure. And, like anywhere else, an independent body should be responsible for her welfare.

wouldn't be surprised if Daddy's favourite is only so because pissing him off would only result in her being 'diagnosed' with the same condition

This is a good point, @NeverDropYourMoonCup. Living like that (the level of control allowed by this conservatorship seems huge) for over a decade is basically a recipe for exacerbation of poor mental state.

The thing is, @ChestnutStuffing, we all know how the industry Britney has been in since she was in her teens, being dressed up in schoolgirl outfits for men's pleasure, treats young females. While I, like you, am not into reading any meaning into Instagram pictures, I also don't trust that the decisions made by judges in these cases are going to be in the genuine "best interests" of the young lucrative females. Especially when they have been controlled in almost every decision for upwards of a decade.

Control of relationships should be a matter for profound ethical debate even for people with severe dementia. For someone of Britney's age (and apparent ability to make money), I think there's good basis for suspecting there's something seriously awry here.

Plenty of rich male celebrities have had issues with mental health and public mental breakdowns - Kanye West for example, I don’t think it’s ever occurred to anyone to take control of his finances. She was taken advantage of and the fact that she was woman went against her and still does.

Britney has maintained she wants the conservatorship to contain and that she needs it. Prior to it being in place she was seriously taken advantage of by a series of manipulative men.

That being said her father isn't who she wants to run it. He's an abusive man, she doesn't see her kids because Kevin Federline had to take a restraining order out on him after he hit her son and he uses her as a cash cow.