Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Britney Spears objected to the conservatorship in 2016.
The law in most countries means those seeking to take responsibility for another persons affairs must prove that the person does not have capacity to manage their own financial affairs and/or daily life due to physical or mental limitations and capacity must be assumed unless proven otherwise.
The five key areas in the UK are:
1. A person must be assumed to have capacity unless it is established that he/she lacks capacity.
2. A person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision unless all practicable steps to help him/her to do so have been taken without success.
3. A person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision merely because he/she makes an unwise decision.
4. An act done, or decision made, under this Act for or on behalf of a person who lacks capacity must be done, or made, in his/ her best interests.
5. Before the act is done, or the decision is made, regard must be had to whether the purpose for which it is needed can be as effectively achieved in a way that is less restrictive of the person’s rights and freedom of action.
It should be noted by lacking capacity this usually refers to someone in the latter stages of dementia or in a coma, and not a middle aged woman who had a mental health issue thirteen years ago and which was related to hounding by the media coupled with a child custody battle, and for which she has now been treated.
A lot of people suffer mental breakdowns in their lives however they usually receive treatment and still have capacity, especially in the longer term following treatment.
There are people who have murdered people during schizophrenic episodes, but have been successfully treated and are back in to society, and have full capacity and control over their affairs, and do not have some long term guardianship or conservatorship, and as already stated this would not be legal in most parts of the civilised world.
Great post. Must spread rep....
I did not know she made that request in 2016. That is very informative and interesting. Thank you for posting that. However, I would note that while she appears to be requesting a relaxation of the terms of the conservatorship here, it does not appear that she is requesting that the conservatorship actually be revoked, which is an important distinction.
The details of the British standard of incapacity are also informative and interesting. It looks like a very good standard and I am reasonably sure that the standard here in the state of Texas is very similar to that.
I do not know specifically what the law is on this in California. However, if there is anyplace that would be inclined to warp and twist the application of even the written law in a way that is detrimental to individual rights and liberties under the law, California is surely at the top of that list. Maybe there is a California attorney around who could offer some commentary on what the practices are there. But if this case is any indication, they have departed from any sort of "liberal" application of the law in these matters.
The judges response to Britney's request for an attorney to represent HER, of her choosing, who does not work for her father, will be telling. And of course so will the judges response to the request by Britney (finally) to free her from this completely inappropriate and apparently corrupt conservatorship arrangement.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 9 days ago)
35,634 posts, read 17,975,706 times
Reputation: 50664
Quote:
Originally Posted by jen5276
Protect the money and protect the person. In NY there are guardianships for property and person. The courts don’t appoint a guardian for either unless there is significant reason to do so.
No one goes after guardianship of just someone who's crazy but poor, is what I'm saying. If there's not money to take from someone, no one is there to take away their rights to live as they wish.
That's the core of this, isn't it? To protect the money, for her heirs and father.
You can't get help for people who are just menaces to themselves, or even who are out on the streets if they have no money, but if someone has a great deal of money, the legal system arrives in full force to protect the person who has money who might fritter it away and leave nothing for those standing there watching it happen.
This isn't about insanity. This is about her family (father) is NOT going to sit there and let other people take the money he himself would like.
You are exactly right about how MONEY plays a huge factor in concern/treatment for mental health!!
If someone is broke and an average Joe, they are lucky to get anyone concerned about their mental health, but introduce millions of dollars into their bank acct and all the sudden, the courts and many others are very concerned about their care and treatment! Its really pathetic.
Many people are also under the impression the celebrities they see on TV and in the movies, they think they are that way in normal life...they do not understand they have a public and private side, nearly all celebrities are NOTHING like their public 'character' in their private lives. I actually am friends with a relative of a very popular A list movie star, they are nothing like the public persona they act out in front of the cameras, she is 28 yrs old, but in real life, her mental capacity is closer to a 14 yr old.
Wow. You are 100% ignorant of the law. Courts, judges etc are involved in appointing a guardian and one is not appointed unless there is significant cause. Britney at the time was running around LA shaving her head, talking in a fake British accent, had some fake manager trying to take control of her money and a lot more.
The courts also review every year the finances of the guardianship and if there is anything questionable, believe me it is brought to light.
OH MY GOODNESS!
She shaved her head! Oh No! Not that!
And even worse - she tried to emulate a British dialect! Well, that does it!
But the next one was what this was really all about, wasn't it? Someone tried to take advantage of her financially - other than her father!
And for that, she has been effectively enslaved for 13 years, with the apparent plan being a life sentence, including to forcible medical disabling of her reproductive functions, against her will.
Why doesn’t she want an evaluation to prove she’s competent then?
Here’s a good explanation
Conservatorships are not universal among disabled people," says Esquibias. "A conservatorship is only for individuals who are substantially unable to manage their own financial resources, resist fraud or undue influence from others; or are unable to make their own medical decisions as determined by a licensed medical practitioner. Considerable evidence is required before a judge imposes a conservatorship. A conservatorship is not a knee-jerk reaction to a disabled person's circumstance. Judges are highly educated, conscientious people who do their best to make the right decision in the best interest of the proposed conservatee."
Why doesn’t she want an evaluation to prove she’s competent then?
Because someone does not have to be "competent" to have the right to self determination. Rather, they have to be proved to be "gravely incapacitated" to have that right to self determination legally taken away from them (i.e., coma, devastating stroke, end stage dementia, etc.). None of the behaviors that Britney has demonstrated has been anywhere close to indicating that she is "gravely incapacitated". In fact, she has an ongoing job in Las Vegas headlining a show that apparently pulls in millions of dollars.
Also, here is the audio of her court hearing last week.
If you listen to that and come back and are willing to say that this presentation was made by someone who is "gravely incapacitated," then you will just not be telling the truth. In fact, I would be willing to bet money that you are not capable of making a similar presentation as well as she did here.
The judge and her father, and probably other members of the cabal that is receiving compensation for containing her should be investigated for criminality and corruption. The treatment she has received has been a violation of her most basic human rights and these people who have participated in this should held be accountable - and punished severely.
And you support this. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Because someone does not have to be "competent" to have the right to self determination. Rather, they have to be proved to be "gravely incapacitated" to have that right to self determination legally taken away from them (i.e., coma, devastating stroke, end stage dementia, etc.). None of the behaviors that Britney has demonstrated has been anywhere close to indicating that she is "gravely incapacitated". In fact, she has an ongoing job in Las Vegas headlining a show that apparently pulls in millions of dollars.
Also, here is the audio of her court hearing last week.
If you listen to that and come back and are willing to say that this presentation was made by someone who is "gravely incapacitated," then you will just not be telling the truth. In fact, I would be willing to bet money that you are not capable of making a similar presentation as well as she did here.
The judge and her father, and probably other members of the cabal that is receiving compensation for containing her should be investigated for criminality and corruption. The treatment she has received has been a violation of her most basic human rights and these people who have participated in this should held be accountable - and punished severely.
And you support this. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Do you have access to her legal and medical records? You have no clue what her condition is, was or will be if left to her own devices. She might be so coherent here because she is on her meds and is doing well now.
If there is any evidence of abuse in his guardianship, then of course, they should be investigated and punished. But all of your posts are a lot of speculation without knowing any actual facts.
Do you have access to her legal and medical records? You have no clue what her condition is, was or will be if left to her own devices.
I do not need access to her medical records to see that she in nowhere close to being "gravely incapacitated". Any doctor or psychiatrist who says that she is should be disbarred, or better yet, imprisoned.
I do not need access to her medical records to see that she in nowhere close to being "gravely incapacitated". Any doctor or psychiatrist who says that she is should be disbarred, or better yet, imprisoned.
What those people have done to her, including the psychiatrists, is absolutely despicable.
It is not "OK".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
