NBC News article: "Britney Spears' conservatorship can be both totally legal and quite bad for her"

[IJustWannaLurk]

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/britney-spears-conservatorship-can-be-both-totally-legal-quite-bad-ncna1247750
 

I didn't see a thread about this yet. If there is one, feel free to delete. I also didn't use quote blocks because they look clunky. A couple of errors in the article (like Ingham only being hired a month ago - ??) but otherwise I liked it.

"The major issue with a conservatorship is that it strips a person of the legal rights to even fight it; to hire an attorney, the person subject to a conservatorship needs permission from the court, but she also lacks standing to bring suit on her own. That’s why most conservatorships survive until death: The people subject to them often lack the legal ability to escape from them."

-

"For a period of time as part of the conservatorship, I was medicated against my will, I could not choose my own doctors or lawyers and I had no right to enter into a lease or even an employment contract of my own choosing. I was legally considered too disabled to be capable of making any of my own decisions.

It was one of the worst times of my life — and there’s stiff competition for that label, given that I served six years in a maximum security prison."

-

"About 1.3 million people find themselves in these arrangements in the United States; $50 billion of their assets are controlled by someone else. We know nothing about their ages, gender or diagnoses — or even if they have official diagnoses in every case — because the data on these legal arrangements is practically nonexistent."

_
 

"We do know that a good number of people under the control of conservatorships likely don’t need to be, and that even more don’t need full guardianship. In 2018, Syracuse law professor Nina Kohn testified as much to the Senate Special Committee on Aging.

An important part of Kohn’s testimony was that often even unintentional harm comes from these relationships: To strip a person of her agency can’t help but be abusive, even when fiduciaries are doing their jobs."

-

"Conservatorships’ message is clear: People who are deemed disabled aren't allowed to behave like full persons.

That’s why there’s strong anecdotal evidence that people improve and even thrive when they’re released from conservatorship controls. The humanizing effect of being granted the authority to make even the smallest decisions can be drastic. As someone forced into one myself, I would expect that, with time and some assistance she seeks out of her own accord, we would come to see a self-possessed woman if Spears' conservatorship were removed."

-

"If Spears’ conservatorship is anything like mine, it can be — or even just feel — more punitive than it is protective. In my case, any disagreement with my conservator landed me in a psychiatric hospital, even though I became the caretaker for my conservator when he suffered a stroke and couldn’t drive himself. Spears, meanwhile, has clearly been competent enough to complete three years of a Las Vegas residency and serve as a judge on "The X Factor" — but, like many of us, she might wonder after years in a conservatorship if she really is capable of deciding matters herself. Or she may fear seeing her relatively scant privileges revoked if she speaks up."

-

"But Spears hasn’t been allowed the most basic human right: the right to err, and then grow and improve from that erring. People grow and change not in spite of their bad decisions, but because of them — if we allow them to."

 

[Jordan Miller]

My dad actually sent me a link to this article yesterday lol. If he is seeing this, the GP is def seeing this.

[Blackout2006]

What? How much did you get paid NBC by TeamCon? how is putting someone into a conservatorship without their knowledge or permission, stripping them off their constituitional rights, the ridiculous pay-roll her handlers get, Britney losing a networth of $600 million dollars into just $50 million dollars or overall, being a scam and money-grab for someone who has performed for 4 world tours be "legal". Have several seats

[IJustWannaLurk]

3 minutes ago, Blackout2006 said:

What? How much did you get paid NBC by TeamCon? how is putting someone into a conservatorship without their knowledge or permission, stripping them off their constituitional rights, the ridiculous pay-roll her handlers get, Britney losing a networth of $600 million dollars into just $50 million dollars or overall, being a scam and money-grab for someone who has performed for 4 world tours be "legal". Have several seats

The article isn't focusing on the legality of it and that's precisely the point: even if it may be legal (which the author doesn't get into debating), it can still be damaging. The focus is on how damaging it is and how conservatorships need more investigation and coverage. There's literally nothing pro-teamcon in this article.

"Rather, there are emotional costs of a long-term conservatorship, especially to an otherwise capable person, and that damage rarely appears in court evaluations or public records."

[Hooked-On-Knee]

On 11/15/2020 at 10:51 AM, Blackout2006 said:

What? How much did you get paid NBC by TeamCon? how is putting someone into a conservatorship without their knowledge or permission, stripping them off their constituitional rights, the ridiculous pay-roll her handlers get, Britney losing a networth of $600 million dollars into just $50 million dollars or overall, being a scam and money-grab for someone who has performed for 4 world tours be "legal". Have several seats

You obviously didn't read the article. .

A conservatorship IS legal, so is many of the things that Britney's team have done. Just because they might have done things are considered to be morally wrong, it's likely much, if not all of what they did was legal, because let's face it, certain people who have been involved in the conservatorship are very "smart" people and know how to use the law to make actions done under the conservatorship legal. 

Britney being denied the right to have Adam Streisand represent her instead of a court-appointed attorney was legal, Britney's dad being allowed to use money in Britney's estate to pay for a large amount of the litigation team he hired is legal, Money in Britney's estate being used to pay for Lou Taylor's legal fees without Britney's consent according to Sam Ingham when Lou Taylor sued someone, could be considered legal by the court. 

The fact that all of this could be considered legal shows why the system of conservatorships should be reformed. 

[Buffybot]

I read yesterday, I really liked the article. It raise a question: the judge and lawyers have any notion of what can happen to Britney mentally in a c-ship? 

If she can work and date men (she was even engaged), How nobody seems worried If the c-ship makes Britney frustrated with the situation? The consequences of that...

Before the c-ship she didn't show signs of severe anxiety. Why nowadays she can't even do a simple video without shaking, looking to the sides and obsessed about her looks. That was supposed to happen?

The case needs more mental health professionals and less attorneys.

The conservatorship is a business, like Wallet said. 

[Oprah Winfrey.]

Just because something is legal. Doesn’t make it right! Slavery was legal, police brutality is legal, denying women the right to an ******** is legal 

Doesn’t make it right tho

 

 

[IJustWannaLurk]

2 minutes ago, Britman512 said:

Just because something is legal. Doesn’t make it right! Slavery was legal, police brutality is legal, denying women the right to an ******** is legal 

Doesn’t make it right tho

  Hide contents

You sound like you’re defending her bs “business model”

 

 

That is the entire point of the article and what that user was saying. 

[LLuvia]

26 minutes ago, Buffybot said:

The case needs more mental health professionals 

This case needs good medical professionals.

They also say that it is said that it has been rumored that Britney is engaged to the "boyfriend" and that is practically impossible, as well as having intimate/***ual relations. A person under these circumstances is almost impossible to marry or have ***ual relations and mostly this must be approved.

This article is very good and many people have been trying to say it in this forum for example.

[Danielle1987]

53 minutes ago, LLuvia said:

A person under these circumstances is almost impossible to marry or have ***ual relations and mostly this must be approved.

Has anyone else read throughout the years on blind item sites that these “relations” always have to be (and are) documented ?

[LLuvia]

2 minutes ago, Danielle1987 said:

Has anyone else read throughout the years on blind item sites that these “relations” always have to be (and are) documented ?

What I know is that a person in these circumstances cannot marry, cannot have children, or have ***ual relations, in some cases it has to be approved and in other cases it is unfeasible.

[Danielle1987]

1 hour ago, LLuvia said:

What I know is that a person in these circumstances cannot marry, cannot have children, or have ***ual relations, in some cases it has to be approved and in other cases it is unfeasible.

I’ve read on blind item sites her “relations” are always documented/recorded.

[Danielle1987]

1 hour ago, LLuvia said:

What I know is that a person in these circumstances cannot marry, cannot have children, or have ***ual relations, in some cases it has to be approved and in other cases it is unfeasible.

Blind Items Revealed

 

February 26, 2014

Usually the items in this spot are longer and more detailed, but I just love this one so much I had to give it this position. Apparently this A+ list celebrity/"singer" is allowed to have *** BUT someone must be watching at all times AND each time is recorded. Talk about performance anxiety. Definitely going to be revealed.

Britney Spears

[Forever22]

I think this is a great article. Good to see more focus on how this is a “legal” arrangement yet there is clear abuse of power and lack of conservatee rights to speak and change the course of their lives without pressure from the court.
 

Conservatees aren’t criminals. Yet the process acts as if they are one. Slow and highly questionable. 
Reform is needed. 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Buffybot said:

I read yesterday, I really liked the article. It raise a question: the judge and lawyers have any notion of what can happen to Britney mentally in a c-ship? 

If she can work and date men (she was even engaged), How nobody seems worried If the c-ship makes Britney frustrated with the situation? The consequences of that...

Before the c-ship she didn't show signs of severe anxiety. Why nowadays she can't even do a simple video without shaking, looking to the sides and obsessed about her looks. That was supposed to happen?

The case needs more mental health professionals and less attorneys.

The conservatorship is a business, like Wallet said. 

Like Wallet said its a business and an experiment. 

And the part u talked about the whole thing having an impact on Britney mentally, just shows Britney the person and her state of mind is the last priority of this whole thing. If anyone there thought about how she felt and how the cship could be affecting her in the long run, would Jamie be allowed as her conservator in the first place? Someone she never had a good relationship with, that had no experience with an empire and failed every business he tried? Not to mention his abusive, messy and drunk past. Almost 13 years later, shes not talking to him, he has a restraining order from her kids, Sam proved he has been mismanaging her money, not respecting any of her wishes, he said shes afraid of him and he talks about her as a racehorse, yet Brenda didnt even suspend him. Shes so unstable and unfit to run her life, but this whole thing with her trying to kick him out and Jamie fighting hiring more lawyers with her money, wont have any impact on her mentally, right?

Another thing is the cship shes under that is for old people that have dementia and cant provide for themselves. Britney isnt even 40 years old and If she can work, tour, record, promote, give interviews, etc, she will want to date, to have a social life and so on. For her to have a so called personal life, they have to control her and the person shes "dating". Its good for them bc Britney distracts herself with men, that way she thinks she has some freedom and she doesnt ***** about the cship all the time, so Jamie analyze, maybe chooses and has some type of control over them even If they arent paid. Thats why they have to sign NDAs. I have wondered If theres smt like "cant get Britney pregnant or ask her to marry" and this way, year by year, her chances of having another child are lower and lower. Also the thing many others have pointed out, its also someone to watch over her for Jamie when he isnt around. It doesnt make any sense that shes under a cship for people who arent all there and cant provide for themselves, but Britney can write songs, record, rehearse, promote, give interviews and make millions for so many people she cant even control or spend like she wants to. She also can date men, have botox, drive sometimes and even depose. Not to mention she even took her kids out of a dangerous situation. 

Another thing the cship failed was the false promise that she would have her boys more. Its 2020 now and she barely sees them and cant even fight for them on court bc shes under a cship. 

[Buffybot]

43 minutes ago, Bundy said:

Like Wallet said its a business and an experiment. 

And the part u talked about the whole thing having an impact on Britney mentally, just shows Britney the person and her state of mind is the last priority of this whole thing. If anyone there thought about how she felt and how the cship could be affecting her in the long run, would Jamie be allowed as her conservator in the first place? Someone she never had a good relationship with, that had no experience with an empire and failed every business he tried? Not to mention his abusive, messy and drunk past. Almost 13 years later, shes not talking to him, he has a restraining order from her kids, Sam proved he has been mismanaging her money, not respecting any of her wishes, he said shes afraid of him and he talks about her as a racehorse, yet Brenda didnt even suspend him. Shes so unstable and unfit to run her life, but this whole thing with her trying to kick him out and Jamie fighting hiring more lawyers with her money, wont have any impact on her mentally, right?

Another thing is the cship shes under that is for old people that have dementia and cant provide for themselves. Britney isnt even 40 years old and If she can work, tour, record, promote, give interviews, etc, she will want to date, to have a social life and so on. For her to have a so called personal life, they have to control her and the person shes "dating". Its good for them bc Britney distracts herself with men, that way she thinks she has some freedom and she doesnt ***** about the cship all the time, so Jamie analyze, maybe chooses and has some type of control over them even If they arent paid. Thats why they have to sign NDAs. I have wondered If theres smt like "cant get Britney pregnant or ask her to marry" and this way, year by year, her chances of having another child are lower and lower. Also the thing many others have pointed out, its also someone to watch over her for Jamie when he isnt around. It doesnt make any sense that shes under a cship for people who arent all there and cant provide for themselves, but Britney can write songs, record, rehearse, promote, give interviews and make millions for so many people she cant even control or spend like she wants to. She also can date men, have botox, drive sometimes and even depose. Not to mention she even took her kids out of a dangerous situation. 

Another thing the cship failed was the false promise that she would have her boys more. Its 2020 now and she barely sees them and cant even fight for them on court bc shes under a cship. 

Yeah, her case is so complicated. I already wrote some time ago, they created a situation so ****ed up with this c-ship that allowed lots of illegal things to be put in place.

Yay Britney is in Maui. But the cship was extended to Hawaii, no wonder that's one of the few places she can go. Her life is extremely controlled, but at the same time they can't let this truth to be out. They need people to see Britney as a non forced, already free woman.

There's more effort to take care of the money, the Britney Spears brand and to hide the fact Britney can't do anything.

And well, they tried to gaslight us and created the narrative "FreeBritney is a conspiracy theory". Thankfully It didn't work.