Britney Spears asks court to end her father's conservatorship

[nkereina]

Yeah, those are speculation off of a remark she made. One I’m sure many of us are guilty of making. She does not say she was diagnosed with it she was comparing her state of mind to it. Lithium is also prescribed for depression. I’m not saying she does or doesn’t have it but the media diagnosing her does more harm than good IMO. As someone who suffers from anxiety and depression it just doesn’t sit right with me when they do that. Mental health is an extremely personal thing.

Did you see the documentary? There's more than these two articles out there from 13+ years ago commenting on it. If its speculation then so be it, but the quotations used from the documentary certainly speak to that. The one article even quotes her as saying the word "bipolar" when discussing it.

Bipolar disorder is often referred to as manic depression. Depression is one symptom of an overarching bipolar diagnosis. So whether the lithium is treating bipolar or depression, its one and the same.

The question is it legally allowed to stop her from doing that, at this time?

The courts have to rule in the best interest of the affected party in a scenario like this. My opinion is that its not in her best interest to have full access to millions of dollars after years under the conservatorship, her lack of money management experience, and her mental illness. As I've said before, I don't think they should keep the conservatorship in place solely for that reason, but to your point, I don't know what legal authority the courts would have to impose assistance for something like that.

it’s probably best to stop claiming it as fact.

All I can base my own opinion on is what I have read, seen, and deduced over the last 14 years. And I say that a someone who was a Britney fan and sat front row at her concert back in 2000. Besides, I don't think Britney or the courts are reading our opinions here anyhow

 

[wenrob]

Did you see the documentary? There's more than these two articles out there from 13+ years ago commenting on it. If its speculation then so be it, but the quotations used from the documentary certainly speak to that. The one article even quotes her as saying the word "bipolar" when discussing it.

Bipolar disorder is often referred to as manic depression. Depression is one symptom of an overarching bipolar diagnosis. So whether the lithium is treating bipolar or depression, its one and the same.


The courts have to rule in the best interest of the affected party in a scenario like this. My opinion is that its not in her best interest to have full access to millions of dollars after years under the conservatorship, her lack of money management experience, and her mental illness. As I've said before, I don't think they should keep the conservatorship in place solely for that reason, but to your point, I don't know what legal authority the courts would have to impose assistance for something like that.


All I can base my own opinion on is what I have read, seen, and deduced over the last 14 years. And I say that a someone who was a Britney fan and sat front row at her concert back in 2000. Besides, I don't think Britney or the courts are reading our opinions here anyhow

You didn’t state it as your opinion though. You called it a diagnosis. We don’t know that as fact. That’s all I’m saying. We don’t go around diagnosing people with Parkinson’s or Cancer, we shouldn’t go around diagnosing their mental health either. It’s part of the reason people don’t talk about it because folks run with what they think they know.

 

[TLSnell1981]

Your understanding is probably right since I didn’t delve too far into it, only that she refuses to work now and the last time she worked was in 2019. In any case, she is not being forced to work now which was how you claimed that her father is abusing her.

He has stepped down as the conservator of her person and he has a 3rd party co-conservator for her finances. He can no longer make decisions alone. It’s a step in the right direction.

Was he always the sole decision maker or were her doctors and the courts involved? The records are sealed but I would bet it's not as simple as some believe. Weren't the complaints of not being able to get a manicure or massage during the pandemic? Does she have no concept of what happened in 2020? She wants no evaluation but hasn't filed a motion either. I could go on and on but her statement was very concerning.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Weren't the complaints of not being able to get a manicure or massage during the pandemic? Does she have no concept of what happened in 2020?

If you're going to make some sort of comment like that you'd have to relook at all the threads here AND all the stories out there. Goodness me that wouldn't even be something on my radar to judge against her given just how much of the population of the U.S. said things quite close to that (with some saying exactly that), even high profiled people. You yourself was quite on the "get back to normalcy" track throughout the pandemic and saying places could be open safely including salons so I'm unsure why you would strike that against her TBH.

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

Was he always the sole decision maker or were her doctors and the courts involved? The records are sealed but I would bet it's not as simple as some believe. Weren't the complaints of not being able to get a manicure or massage during the pandemic? Does she have no concept of what happened in 2020? She wants no evaluation but hasn't filed a motion either. I could go on and on but her statement was very concerning.

This seems like an unfair statement. How many people here bragged about how their areas never shut down and they continued on as normal? How many pushed to reopen things? Why are you holding her to a different standard?

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

Did you see the documentary? There's more than these two articles out there from 13+ years ago commenting on it. If its speculation then so be it, but the quotations used from the documentary certainly speak to that. The one article even quotes her as saying the word "bipolar" when discussing it.


All I can base my own opinion on is what I have read, seen, and deduced over the last 14 years. And I say that a someone who was a Britney fan and sat front row at her concert back in 2000. Besides, I don't think Britney or the courts are reading our opinions here anyhow

Yes, I watched the documentary. It still doesn’t prove anything. Also, you didn’t state any of it as opinion, you stated it as fact. And that is dangerous.

 

[TLSnell1981]

If you're going to make some sort of comment like that you'd have to relook at all the threads here AND all the stories out there. Goodness me that wouldn't even be something on my radar to judge against her given just how much of the population of the U.S. said things quite close to that (with some saying exactly that), even high profiled people. You yourself was quite on the "get back to normalcy" track throughout the pandemic and saying places could be open safely including salons so I'm unsure why you would strike that against her TBH.

Oh my! Not the only comment made by Brittany that is concerning. IMO much has been taken out of context as pointed out by other posts.

She was advised not to make the statement imo she should have listened to her legal counsel.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Oh my! Not the only comment made by Brittany that is concerning. IMO much has been taken out of context as pointed out by other posts.

She was advised not to make the statement imo she should have listened to her legal counsel.

I'm directly speaking to just the portion of your quote that I quoted.

Weren't the complaints of not being able to get a manicure or massage during the pandemic? Does she have no concept of what happened in 2020?

It has nothing to do with legal counsel suggestion, nothing to do with her comment.

If you're going to say "does she have no concept of what happened in 2020?" because she made a comment about "not being able to get a manicure or a massage during the pandemic" my response will be exactly what I wrote.

We really can't talk about the pandemic much anymore so it's probably best we leave it out of the conversation.

 

[Heigh-Ho]

I feel compassion towards Britney. That doesn't mean I don't see she couldn't benefit from guidance and some form of assistance. However, in my opinion there is too much control over her day to day life and her person. It's gone beyond to me what I could imagine the original intent was.

I do think the gender differences is an important aspect because I don't know that you would find a similar situation where a male was given a chemical castration which is basically the only equivalent to birth control, can anyone think of where that would happen in this situation?

At this point I wonder if the current arrangement is causing more mental harm and isn't that what it was in part put in place to ease because of what she was going through when it was applied? Can't this also be amplifying issues? Maybe there should be an easing up of things. And after so many years I think her father should go back to primarily being her father instead of in such control over her. Many of us think having family members would be best and in many ways they are but this seems like that ship sailed long ago and it might be best to have someone who is just a 3rd party be in control. But I honestly question if a conservatorship is the answer. Maybe if it was treated as a more revocable, fluid arrangement that might be different but from what I've read here on this thread it sounds like something that isn't that way at all. Is this arrangement helping Britney or just keeping her at a constant state? That's an ethnical question to me as much as an observational one.

 

[TLSnell1981]

I feel compassion towards Britney. That doesn't mean I don't see she couldn't benefit from guidance and some form of assistance. However, in my opinion there is too much control over her day to day life and her person. It's gone beyond to me what I could imagine the original intent was.

I do think the gender differences is an important aspect because I don't know that you would find a similar situation where a male was given a chemical castration which is basically the only equivalent to birth control, can anyone think of where that would happen in this situation?

At this point I wonder if the current arrangement is causing more mental harm and isn't that what it was in part put in place to ease because of what she was going through when it was applied? Can't this also be amplifying issues? Maybe there should be an easing up of things. And after so many years I think her father should go back to primarily being her father instead of in such control over her. Many of us think having family members would be best and in many ways they are but this seems like that ship sailed long ago and it might be best to have someone who is just a 3rd party be in control. But I honestly question if a conservatorship is the answer. Maybe if it was treated as a more revocable, fluid arrangement that might be different but from what I've read here on this thread it sounds like something that isn't that way at all. Is this arrangement helping Britney or just keeping her at a constant state? That's an ethnical question to me as much as an observational one.

The court records are sealed and this has been ongoing for 13 years with little change. She hasn't filed a motion nor does she want an evaluation. Brittany's perception...everyone is mean, stupid and out to get her. Her speech was rapid and mostly rambling. She may have created outrage and garnered public support but probably not much where it matters.... Some do not improve with treatment or medication. This does not appear to be situational but sadly long term. It is heartbreaking for everyone involved.

I'm thankful we are having this discussion instead of what could have been the fallout if her family hadn't cared or been granted a conservatorship and KF custody of the children. Brittany is alive and her children are safe. She also still has financial means to be cared for...not on the streets or dead. Too many mentally ill or disabled persons have much worse outcomes.

 

[Heigh-Ho]

The court records are sealed and this has been ongoing for 13 years with little change. She hasn't filed a motion nor does she want an evaluation. Brittany's perception...everyone is mean, stupid and out to get her. Her speech was rapid and mostly rambling. She may have created outrage and garnered public support but probably not much where it matters.... Some do not improve with treatment or medication. This does not appear to be situational but sadly long term. It is heartbreaking for everyone involved.

I'm thankful we are having this discussion instead of what could have been the fallout if her family hadn't cared or been granted a conservatorship and KF custody of the children. Brittany is alive and her children are safe. She also still has financial means to be cared for...not on the streets or dead. Too many mentally ill or disabled persons have much worse outcomes.

Do you just not like Britney or something? I don't mean to sound curt here.

Most of the comments here and mine as well weren't exactly talking about her on a personal level but also towards the system itself. I must say some of the posters here give me the impression that there's a dislike of her and so when things are brought up it's almost dismissed.

So the qualifications of the ethical treatment of someone such that Britney has had is that she's alive and her children are safe and she's not dead on the streets like people who are unrelated to her situation are? And we assume that she's a lost cause, just write her off. That seems to bring back mental institutions of the past where we just shoved people there and largely forgot them..on purpose

 

[AndreaA]

Brittany's perception...everyone is mean, stupid and out to get her. Her speech was rapid and mostly rambling. She may have created outrage and garnered public support but probably not much where it matters.... Some do not improve with treatment or medication. This does not appear to be situational but sadly long term. It is heartbreaking for everyone involved.

The way that you state all this as fact is really distasteful at the very least. You have zero idea about her true mental state. Her issue “does not appear to be situational but sadly long term” - yeah, says you! Unless she’s your patient, perhaps you need to take a step back. It’s disturbing to me when people think that what is happening with her is perfectly fine, no questions asked. Maybe her speech was rapid and rambling because she’s under an extreme amount of stress with this hanging over her head. People who say she sounds depressed and troubled are basically stating the OBVIOUS. ANYONE would be depressed and troubled if they were in her situation. Sheeeeeesh.

I don’t see many people saying “sure, just give her her money and her freedom and forget about her” but frankly if she wasn’t a hyper-wealthy celebrity, that’s exactly what would have happened, and far from suffering, most people in that situation DO muddle through - half of Hollywood, for example.

 

[TLSnell1981]

Do you just not like Britney or something? I don't mean to sound curt here.

Most of the comments here and mine as well weren't exactly talking about her on a personal level but also towards the system itself. I must say some of the posters here give me the impression that there's a dislike of her and so when things are brought up it's almost dismissed.

So the qualifications of the ethical treatment of someone such that Britney has had is that she's alive and her children are safe and she's not dead on the streets like people who are unrelated to her situation are? And we assume that she's a lost cause, just write her off. That seems to bring back mental institutions of the past where we just shoved people there and largely forgot them..on purpose

Of course this isn’t personal. I actually like Brittany Spears. By no means should anyone be written off or their best interests go unaddressed. My opinion...this is way more complicated than simply #freeBrittany.

 

[TLSnell1981]

The way that you state all this as fact is really distasteful at the very least. You have zero idea about her true mental state. Her issue “does not appear to be situational but sadly long term” - yeah, says you! Unless she’s your patient, perhaps you need to take a step back. It’s disturbing to me when people think that what is happening with her is perfectly fine, no questions asked. Maybe her speech was rapid and rambling because she’s under an extreme amount of stress with this hanging over her head. People who say she sounds depressed and troubled are basically stating the OBVIOUS. ANYONE would be depressed and troubled if they were in her situation. Sheeeeeesh.

I don’t see many people saying “sure, just give her her money and her freedom and forget about her” but frankly if she wasn’t a hyper-wealthy celebrity, that’s exactly what would have happened, and far from suffering, most people in that situation DO muddle through - half of Hollywood, for example.

Thirteen years is long term in my opinion. If her rapid and rambling speech isn’t indicative of ongoing issues an evaluation should be able to determine that. Look there could be and likely are multiple reasons for Brittany’s conservatorship . She gave a statement from her POV. She wasn’t questioned ...nothing verified or challenged. Her attorney advised against it for very good reasons.

 

[Heigh-Ho]

Of course this isn’t personal. I actually like Brittany Spears. By no means should anyone be written off or their best interests go unaddressed. My opinion...this way more complicated than simply #freeBrittany.

And I agree honestly but you respond the same way to people regardless. When they bring up some oversight likely should be there, when they bring up the amount of detail into the control (like birth control and who she can and cannot see), when they talk about who should be in control (her dad or someone else), when they talk about what help she is getting. All of that and more you just basically say the same thing. I don't mean this rudely but I think other posters are giving more into the 'it's complicated' than you appear to be. When I read your comments they come off simple 'she's under this for a reason, it's been 13 years, she's rambling, she won't get better, she should have kept her mouth shut, she's alive not homeless or dead, etc' it seems very cut and dried for you when for other people there seems to be more complexities to it which prompts questions into why she has so little say, why are things being handled this way and is the way conservatorship done in our country actually a good thing or should there be adjustments and more.

And maybe I missed it but how do you feel about them putting her on birth control? Would you say a male should have chemicals given to him so he cannot procreate?

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

Sounds like her sister, Jamie Lynn, is in favor (or at least supportive) of ending the conservatorship.

https://people.com/music/jamie-lynn-spears-only-concerned-with-britney-spears-happiness/

 

[tink89]

It’s interesting how two people can listen to the same thing and come away with two very different opinions.

agreed. When I heard her statement it sounded like someone who has been wanting to get something off their chest for a very long time. She was talking fast and did slow down when asked by the judged but to me she sounded just nervous.

I have been reading through this thread and I while she may or may not have a mild or severe mental illness, it is very sad to hear that someone is being forced to work, forced to be on birth control. It is sad that the person working and making all these millions is not able to go on vacation when they want or see their friends or do anything else with out approval. The finances are one issue but everything else seems like it needs a change. The fact that she wants therapy in her own home yet they make her go out in person to a doctor in a famous area is crazy especially with all the telehealth there is.

 

[Orion Nebula]

Back when she was in the limelight, she was looking at "acted erratic" in the rear view mirror. Without help, she could easily have run through everything she'd earned -- do you think that now, some 15-20 years later -- she'd be happier if she'd been allowed to do that?
It's a lose-lose thing.

She seems pretty miserable now, so who knows. The main thing is that after she calmed down she still had earning potential. So even if she blew her money her life may not have been over. And if she did blow her money that's her business. It's not her fathers who obviously took advantage of the situation to "cash in" on his daughter.

Ya I mean things suck either way for her but I am a believer of letting people make their own choices for better or worse.

 

[Orion Nebula]

Her father stepped in to stop her decline into all that you mentioned that happened other celebrities. Do you really feel like she should have been allowed to self destruct? She's LUCKY that she had someone to care for her. Her father and the other conservator(s) may be grifters, but they are grifters who saved her when she needed to be saved. Frankly, I don't really have an opinion if her conservatorship should end because I do not know her current mental state of affairs. That is for the court and the doctors to figure out. I am glad that she is challenging it, but that doesn't mean that it's not really the best thing for her and her kids.

Ya her father obviously did so out of the good of his heart (lol). Sure her father might have "saved" her but in turn she was locked away, without acces to her own money and even had her women rights taken away (IUD). Banned from actually having a happy life so it seems. There is a lot more to this story than "father saves daughter", it's kind of odd that some don't realize the scope of this. Regardless her conservators cash in on her still to this day, she is still "locked" up and being refused to live her own life.

I personally believe in people's rights, freedoms and being able to make their own decisions regardless of how stupid they are.

 

[rigs32]

She hasn't asked for a new attorney because she's not allowed to! A number of years ago, she petitioned the Court to allow her to choose the attorney assigned to represent her interests and the Court denied the request. The court appointed attorney, according to the last hearing, has never told Britney what she would need to do to end the conservatorship. It's unethical on his part, imo, and he should be sanctioned by the bar association. He's making much more off his client than his client is allowed to have in her own possession. It's wrong, full stop.