Free Britney!

[jollyroger85]

Sure. My point simply was that ending the conservatorship doesn't have to mean Spears is ruined. She can hire responsible people and rely on their advice and guidance -- or not. The possibility of a bad outcome in no way justifies continuing the conservatorship.

And one often discussed alternative to conservatorships is "supported decision-making," where the subject makes decisions with input from friends and experts he chooses.
https://www.arcind.org/future-planning/supported-decision-making/

Just this am, Daddy chimed in, saying essentially, no matter what else happens, He's taken all that money from her and noone's getting it back. Special place in hell for that **** stain

 

[Bob001]

Just this am, Daddy chimed in, saying essentially, no matter what else happens, He's taken all that money from her and noone's getting it back. Special place in hell for that **** stain

Not only is he evil for doing it, he's colossally stupid for saying it.

On the other hand, her mom is on her side.

"I became involved in this conservatorship because I wanted to ensure that everything in my daughter’s life was handled in the best interests of my daughter, the conservatee," Lynne states. "Which I did not believe at the time (and I still do not today) to be the case."

Lynne claims that, at the so-called "time of crisis," Jamie had hired a "sports enhancement doctor" to treat Britney, and that "the doctor in question was a psychiatrist who was prescribing what I and many others thought to be entirely inappropriate medicine to my daughter, who did not want to take the medicine."

"I witnessed my daughter be compelled by that doctor, with the knowledge and encouragement of Mr. Spears, to enter a health facility that she did not want to enter, where she was threatened with punishment if she did not stay for medical treatment that she did not want to endure," Lynne alleges in her statement.

Lynne claims that Jamie has "exercised absolutely microscopic control over the conservatee and her actions," and alleges that Jamie has tasked those working for Britney -- including "medical aides on site at the conservatee’s home, and her own security detail" -- to report back to him on "every detail of every action that takes place in the conservatee’s home and her life."

"Such scrutiny is exhausting and terrifying," Lynne states. "Like living in custody."

https://www.etonline.com/britney-sp...-putting-his-daughters-interests-ahead-of-his

 

[gnome]

Just this am, Daddy chimed in, saying essentially, no matter what else happens, He's taken all that money from her and noone's getting it back. Special place in hell for that **** stain

Link? Not doubting, I just want to read more.

 

[Minoosh]

Competent lawyers and managers should be able to protect her from them and even from herself, as they do for other celebrities. That's what she's never had with Daddy in charge.

I hope she does choose to allow such a structure if she succeeds in getting out of the conservatorship. People who can protect her, not control her.

ETA: As Suburban Turkey said, the possibility that she could be financially ruined is not really the point. Still, trusts can be set up to ensure she does not end up penniless, if that's what she wants.

 

[Warp12]

No, someone can't. That information is contained in confidential medical records. Nothing short of a court order will show them to you.

But yet, we seem to have plenty of experts who are commenting on her mental health status as though they know all of the facts. Go figure.

Who needs any "stupid evaluations", as she calls them...right?

My first post, from page 1:

I feel like there is a lot more to her condition than is publicly known. A lot is probably kept hidden in order to keep her "brand" somewhat intact.

Now we have come full circle, it seems, after 12 pages.

 

[gnome]

I don't think that it's an unwarranted comment to point out that nothing that is publicly known seems to justify her situation. Yes, there might be something massive that changes everything still to be revealed, but it seems odd to hang on to that possibility, and get upset with people who are worried that someone with significant financial incentive might possibly be exceeding their authority.

 

[Warp12]

I don't think that it's an unwarranted comment to point out that nothing that is publicly known seems to justify her situation. Yes, there might be something massive that changes everything still to be revealed, but it seems odd to hang on to that possibility, and get upset with people who are worried that someone with significant financial incentive might possibly be exceeding their authority.

Upset? What are you talking about? Hang on to what "possibility"? The "possibility" that the courts, doctors, and family may have not conspired in an evil way?

I am just pointing out the obvious....nobody here, or in the media, really knows her medical diagnosis. A lot of people seem to be caught up in their feelings, without any concern for real evidence.

 

[arthwollipot]

But yet, we seem to have plenty of experts who are commenting on her mental health status as though they know all of the facts. Go figure.

No-one commenting on her mental health status thinks that they are an expert, or that they know all of the facts. That is so eye-wateringly obvious that it shouldn't need to actually be said, but here we are.

Who needs any "stupid evaluations", as she calls them...right?

You're absolutely right. No-one needs stupid evaluations. She's already had stupid evaluations performed by stupid people under orders from her stupid father. What she really needs is a real evaluation by a trusted and properly qualified health care professional who is not linked in any way to her stupid father. But a mental health evaluation really needs to be volunteered for - if she doesn't want one, no-one can force her to undergo one. At least, that's how it is in a circumstance where one is not kept in virtual slavery to one's stupid father.

 

[Warp12]

You're absolutely right. No-one needs stupid evaluations. She's already had stupid evaluations performed by stupid people under orders from her stupid father. What she really needs is a real evaluation by a trusted and properly qualified health care professional who is not linked in any way to her stupid father. But a mental health evaluation really needs to be volunteered for - if she doesn't want one, no-one can force her to undergo one. At least, that's how it is in a circumstance where one is not kept in virtual slavery to one's stupid father.

Great, unprejudiced argument.

 

[arthwollipot]

Great, unprejudiced argument.

Expressed opinion.

 

[Warp12]

No-one commenting on her mental health status thinks that they are an expert, or that they know all of the facts. That is so eye-wateringly obvious that it shouldn't need to actually be said, but here we are.

But, apparently they are expert enough to mount conspiracy theories and call her father and doctors stupid. Got it.

 

[xjx388]

But, apparently they are expert enough to mount conspiracy theories and call her father and doctors stupid. Got it.

Forget whether or not her father or doctors are stupid. Think about this: What mental conditions would one have to have in order for a judge to rule that one is incapable of making their own decisions?

In my view, it would have to be advanced dementia or some other condition, such as mental retardation, which severely affects the ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs). The mere assertion that they make bad decisions would not be enough -again, in my view- to place someone in a conservatorship.

So what’s your view? Because from where I sit, she is quite capable of performing ADLs. The fact that she can perform and embark on tours and residencies makes this obvious.

The reason I feel this way is because I put myself in those shoes. I have a right to spend my money and live my life as I see fit, even if other people think I’m being stupid.

 

[Warp12]

So what’s your view? Because from where I sit, she is quite capable of performing ADLs.

My view is that I trust the opinion of family, doctors, and the courts (who have access to real information), more than I trust internet speculation. Until proven otherwise, of course.

Without the full evidence, we are just one step away from being a "truther". If even.

 

[arthwollipot]

But, apparently they are expert enough to mount conspiracy theories and call her father and doctors stupid. Got it.

I used the word "stupid" to re-emphasise my previous point since you didn't appear to have got it, because it's a word that does not carry any technical meaning in the mental health field, and because it's the word that she herself used.

 

[psionl0]

My view is that I trust the opinion of family, doctors, and the courts (who have access to real information), more than I trust internet speculation. Until proven otherwise, of course.

Without the full evidence, we are just one step away from being a "truther". If even.

It seems to me that "conservatorship" is equivalent to institutionalization except that a person who is institutionalized is subject to periodic reviews of their mental status.

Would you say that Brittney Spears should be institutionalized?

 

[Paul2]

Great, unprejudiced argument.

Nothing in what you highlighted is evidence of a prejudiced argument.

 

[Belz...]

Great, unprejudiced argument.

Great dodge. Highlight words you can disagree with, and avoid the entire argument.

 

[xjx388]

My view is that I trust the opinion of family, doctors, and the courts (who have access to real information), more than I trust internet speculation. Until proven otherwise, of course.

Without the full evidence, we are just one step away from being a "truther". If even.

OK, but let's take Brittney out of the equation. In general, what kinds of mental conditions or circumstances warrant taking someone's autonomy away by putting someone into a conservatorship?

My opinion is that it would only be applied in the most extreme of circumstances. A person would need to be severly mentally incapacitated to the extent that they actually cannot care for themselves anymore because they don't even think about stuff like bathing, eating, shopping, etc -ADLs.

 

[Bob001]

My view is that I trust the opinion of family, doctors, and the courts (who have access to real information), more than I trust internet speculation. Until proven otherwise, of course.

Without the full evidence, we are just one step away from being a "truther". If even.

It is clear that in many of these cases, the courts just act as a rubber stamp. The courts made what was supposed to be a temporary conservatorship permanent in about 10 months. Her father falsely claimed that she had dementia -- at age 24. After that, like a criminal conviction, the burden of proof fell on her to prove that she didn't deserve it. But unlike an inmate, she wasn't allowed to hire her own doctors or lawyers.

Why would you presume that her family has only her best interests at heart, when many millions of dollars are at stake?

 

[Belz...]

Why would you presume that her family has only her best interests at heart, when many millions of dollars are at stake?

I think we can conclude that Warp's family is very honest and supportive. Unfortunately that's made him a bit naive about people in general.