Free Britney?

[The Larch]

So, is anyone following the court case surrounding the Britney Spears' conservatorship? I must admit I was not paying much attention to it, but some of the details that come out are pretty concerning.

An article on the topic from the most recent court hearing:

'I deserve to have a life': Britney Spears asks court to end conservatorship
Singer directly addresses the court: 'This conservatorship is doing me way more harm than good'

Britney Spears has called for an end to the "abusive" conservatorship that has governed her life for 13 years, delivering an emotional speech to a Los Angeles court and saying: "I just want my life back."

Spears addressed the court during a hearing on the unusual legal arrangement that has stripped the singer of her independence since 2008. The conservatorship has given her father, Jamie Spears, control over her estate, career and other aspects of her personal life.

"I want to end the conservatorship without being evaluated," Spears said in a lengthy speech, during which she condemned her father and the others who have controlled the arrangement.

"This conservatorship is doing me way more harm than good," she said. "I deserve to have a life ... I'm great at what I do. All I want is to own my money ... [and] share my story to the world. I want to be able to be heard."

Spears said she has been forced to work against her will, and that the conservatorship has blocked her from getting married and having a baby. She said she wanted to get her birth control removed so she could try to have another child, but that she was not allowed to go to the doctor. She said her boyfriend is also prohibited from driving her in his car, and that she is blocked from seeing some friends.

She directly excoriated her father, saying, "He loved the control to hurt his own daughter 100,000%." At one point, she said, she cried for an hour on the phone and said he "loved" it and enjoyed having control over someone as powerful as her.

"I've lied and told the whole world I'm OK and I'm happy," Spears said, adding that she wanted to sue her family. She compared her situation to "sex trafficking", noting that she was forced to work while having no control over her finances and no independence: "The people who did that to me should not be able to walk away so easily."

Spears, who appeared by phone and spoke rapidly, said her management had threatened to sue her if she didn't perform in 2018: "It was very threatening and scary ... I'm not here to be anyone's slave."

She said her management falsely accused her of not taking her medication at the time. She also said the conservatorship has recently forced her to attend therapy in Westlake, where she gets bombarded by the paparazzi, and she requested that she be allowed to do therapy in her home: "I deserve privacy ... It's not OK to force me to do anything I don't want to."

She said she was at one point forced to take lithium, which was very strong: "I felt drunk. I couldn't even have a conversation with my mom or dad really about anything ... my whole family did nothing." At the hearing, she requested that she be allowed to choose her own lawyer, and that she be permitted to speak out, noting that her parents give media interviews while she is barred from talking to press.

"I shouldn't be in a conservatorship if I can work," she said, adding: "The laws need to change ... I don't feel like I can live a full life."

In a short statement at the end of the hearing, Vivian Thoreen, the attorney for Jamie Spears, said: "He is sorry to see his daughter suffering and in so much pain. Mr Spears loves his daughter and misses her very much."

The judge, Brenda Penny, said the singer's lawyer could file a formal petition to end the conservatorship.

An attorney for Jodi Montgomery, Spears's licensed conservator, said in an email that the lawyer has an "obligation to uphold Ms Spears' medical and other privacy rights", adding, "We look forward to addressing all of Ms Spears' concerns and setting forth her medical team's perspective on them in a care plan that we will file with the court."

'This is unacceptable'
The singer's appearance was highly anticipated; the 39-year-old star almost never participates in the court proceedings, but her lawyer this year told the judge she wanted to speak out and requested a hearing "on an expedited basis".

It also comes one day after the New York Times reported on confidential documents revealing that Spears has for years strongly objected to the conservatorship and the many powers her father has had over her.

Outside the courtroom on Wednesday, fans had gathered hours before the hearing was due to start, wearing #FreeBritney flags and shirts and holding cardboard cutouts of the star.

"I want people to understand that this is unacceptable. This is not a gray area, he-said-she-said situation. In my view, a crime has been committed against Britney Spears," said Tess Barker, the co-host of the popular Britney's Gram podcast, who has consistently attended the singer's hearings.

Carlos Morales, 26, who showed up with a large Britney flag, added, "She's been with me all my life. Her music is inspiration to me, and I'm here to support her and pay her back."

Fellow celebrities also voiced their support for Spears following the hearing. "We love you Britney!!! Stay strong," Mariah Carey tweeted, while Brandy said she was sending "love and support to Britney Spears and her fans". The actor and activist Rose McGowan; the Planned Parenthood president, Alexis McGill Johnson; and the View co-host Meghan McCain also spoke out on Twitter against Spears' conservatorship.

Justin Timberlake, her former boyfriend who has faced widespread scrutiny for the way he treated the star, tweeted, "We should all be supporting Britney at this time ... No woman should ever be restricted from making decisions about her own body."

Conservatorship is a type of court-appointed guardianship intended for people who can no longer make decisions for themselves, typically older and infirm people. But critics have argued that the process can be exploited and have pointed to Spears's case as an example of such abuse.

Spears's arrangement has faced intense scrutiny in the months since the release of Framing Britney Spears, a New York Times-produced documentary that chronicled the fraught process that led the courts to place the singer under a conservatorship. The film cast a harsh light on the abusive paparazzi and media that aggressively covered Spears's mental health challenges, and also depicted her father as being largely absent from her life until he took control of her estate amid the singer's struggles.

A lawyer who claimed to have met with Spears in 2008 told the film-makers that she had said at the time she did not want her father as a conservator. The documentary further highlighted the apparent contradictions of her arrangement – that she could be performing sold-out shows and making millions, but also be considered incapable of making basic decisions about her health and finances.

Spears's lawyers, appointed by the court, filed for Jamie to be removed as a conservator last year, alleging that the singer was "afraid of her father" and claiming she would not perform while he continued to exercise control of her estate. Jamie is a co-conservator of the estate alongside a corporate fiduciary, known as Bessemer Trust.

Her father had previously acted as a personal conservator, giving him authority over her medical and mental health treatment, but a professional licensed conservator has taken over that job.

'A controlling tool'
The Times report on Tuesday revealed that Spears told a court investigator in 2016 that the conservatorship had "become an oppressive and controlling tool against her" and she had raised concerns that the arrangement gave her father authority over who she dated and befriended, how she designed her kitchen and how much money she was given as a weekly allowance. She also said she was forced to perform while sick with a 104F fever.

#FreeBritney activists, who were featured in the documentary, have pushed for Jamie to be ousted and for the conservatorship to be entirely dissolved.

"I want her to be able to speak freely from her heart, and I'm praying that the judge actually listens," said Junior Olivas, a #FreeBritney advocate, before the hearing. "The whole world is watching this case, and the time is now for Britney to really let them know what she wants."

The 33-year-old longtime fan, who appeared in the documentary, has for years rallied outside the courtroom in support of the singer.

"In the beginning, no one paid attention or laughed us off ... but finally people are paying attention and actually understanding that something is wrong here." The revelations this week added fuel to their cause, he said: "She was crying for help but nobody was listening."

Megan Radford, another #FreeBritney advocate, noted that male celebrities have not faced the same kind of scrutiny and loss of autonomy when they have suffered public breakdowns.

"It's dangerously stigmatizing to say someone who may or may not have mental health struggles needs to have their rights stripped away from them and reassigned to another human being," she added. The Times report, she said, made clear that the "justice system has failed Britney ... She has been totally robbed of 13 years of her life for no reason."

"I watched Britney grow up. I've been a fan since she was a teenager," said Kim Van Doorn, 45, outside the courthouse on Wednesday. Van Doorn came with her wife to LA, traveling from Bakersfield, hours north of the courthouse. "I want whatever she wants for her future. But of course as a fan, I want her to continue to make music and come back as the bad Britney bitch that she is."

Spears appeared to endorse the #FreeBritney movement in a statement from her lawyer last year that said, "Britney welcomes and appreciates the informed support of her many fans." Her father had dismissed the campaign as a conspiracy theory.

A representative for Jamie's lawyer declined to comment on the New York Times report on Tuesday. His attorney told reporters in February, "Jamie Spears has diligently and professionally carried out his duties as one of Britney's conservators, and his love for his daughter and dedication to protecting her is clearly apparent to the court."

And some of the key claims:

Denied another child, forced to perform: key claims from Britney Spears' hearing
The singer detailed the conservatorship's control including not allowing her to remove her IUD and forcing her to take medications

Spears said the conservatorship has had control over the most intimate details of her life, including her reproductive health
The singer, who has two children from a previous relationship, said she'd like to get her IUD removed and have another child, but the conservatorship, which controls her medical care, won't allow it. "I want to be able to get married and have a baby," she told the court. "I was told right now in the conservatorship I am not able to get married or have a baby." She said she is banned from seeing her friends who live minutes away from her, and that her boyfriend is not allowed to drive her in his car.

Spears said she was forced to take medications that she did not want
She said she has had no control over her healthcare, alleging that doctors changed her medication to lithium, a mood stabilizer, after she had told management she wanted to discontinue her Las Vegas residency. "I felt drunk. I couldn't even have a conversation with my mom or dad about anything," she said of the experience, adding that her family did not come to her aid. "My whole family did nothing," she said. She said she wants to do therapy at home, but instead has been forced to go to a location where the paparazzi stalks her.

She said she was forced to perform against her will
Spears alleged that her management threatened to sue her in 2018 if she didn't do her concerts. She said her management falsely reported to her therapists that she wasn't taking her medications. Spears had issued a similar statement to a judge in 2019, confidential court records obtained by the New York Times revealed earlier this week. "It was very threatening and scary," she told the court on Wednesday. "The only similar thing to this is called sex trafficking ... The people who did this to me should not be able to walk away so easily ... I'm not here to be anyone's slave. I can say no to a dance move."

She said the conservatorship was abusive and unnecessary, echoing the arguments that #FreeBritney activists have made for years
Spears said it "made no sense" that the conservatorship deemed her able to perform at the highest level of the entertainment industry, but she was unable to make basic life decisions or spend the money she is earning. "I'm great at what I do," she said, adding that there are a "thousand conservatorships that are abusive as well". "I shouldn't be in a conservatorship if I can work," Spears said. "The laws need to change ... I don't feel like I can live a full life." The people who control her life, she said, "need to be reminded they actually work for me".

She said her father has not had her best interest at heart and enjoyed controlling her.
"He loved the control to hurt his own daughter 100,000%," she said, noting that at one point she was forced to go to rehab against her will and pay $60,000, and her father didn't care about how distraught she was: "I cried on the phone for an hour and he loved every minute of it." She said, "Anything that happened to me had to be approved by my dad."

She lamented that she has been unable to speak out
Spears noted that her parents are able to give interviews with the press whenever they want but she is barred from speaking to the media: "I can't say one thing ... I have a right to use my voice."

"I've lied and told the whole world I'm OK and I'm happy," she continued, adding that she initially feared speaking out. "I honestly don't think anyone would believe me."

She started the hearing by noting that she had not addressed the court since a closed door session in 2019, and did not feel heard by the judges in her case. "I don't think I was heard on any level when I came to court last time." The Times report this week suggested that she had expressed grave concerns about the conservatorship to an investigator in 2016, but that her pleas at the time did not lead to any major changes in the arrangement.

At the start of the hearing, an attorney for the conservator raised concerns about her testimony being public, but Spears quickly interjected and said: "I feel like it should be an open court hearing and they should listen and hear what I have to say." The judge agreed.

[Valmy]

What the hell? I have never even heard of this before. You can be put under somebody else's care and forced to work against your will to financially benefit others? I thought slavery had been outlawed.

What a weird freaking law. Clearly meant for elderly people who have dementia or something.

[The Larch]

What the hell? I have never even heard of this before. You can be put under somebody else's care and forced to work against your will to financially benefit others? I thought slavery had been outlawed.

Not just that, but also removing her say from decisions regarding her physical and mental health, as well as her relationships with others. She seems to be basically a puppet, while still being a very active entertainer who keeps generating plenty of money for others.

Besides the economic stuff, what I find more egregious is how she had an IDU forcefully implanted on her which she can't remove herself, and how her desire to get married to her current partner has been blocked.

What a weird freaking law. Clearly meant for elderly people who have dementia or something.

That's what the article claims, that it's more commonly used for the elderly and infirm who can't take care of themselves anymore, but that the law itself can be exploited.

[Valmy]

Ok the whole reason we have judges is so a person can be there to make sure that stupid bullshit like a law intended for elderly demented people doesn't get applied to working adults who can then be ordered to work against their will to enrich other people. Seems highly unconstitutional and a violation of human rights. That judge should be disbarred for life.

[Syt]

Regardless of whether she's in a mental state to look after herself and conservatorship is justified - it seems at least very odd that she's then still deemed fit to appear in front of audiences to perform.

[Josquius]

I honestly have no idea.
If what she is saying is right then its an absolute shambles, completely shows up the whole system of guardianship for the mess it is. If a high profile case like Britney can go through this then what hope is there for normal people?

On the other hand she's in this situation because of her dodgy mental health. Who knows how much of this is real.

I'm in no position to say either way. Hope the courts figure it out.

[The Brain]

I don't know what the relevant laws say. It does seem weird that a person who can work is considered to be unable to make basic decisions.

[Sheilbh]

The documentary on this was incredible - I had no idea about this system - but it was also about the wider level of (from the perspective of now) incredible misogyny and weirdness around her when she became huge. It went through that - and also the framing of her various "break-downs" (in particular they look a lot more explicable if you have a wide lens and see how many paps are surrounding her) through to the conservatorship.

I am convinced and fully on the free Britney wing.

[The Brain]

FWIW I don't think the situation as described would be legal in Sweden.

[Valmy]

FWIW I don't think the situation as described would be legal in Sweden.

It shouldn't be legal anywhere. It is a gross violation of civil and human rights.

But I guess it is possible the story is being misreported.

The documentary on this was incredible - I had no idea about this system - but it was also about the wider level of (from the perspective of now) incredible misogyny and weirdness around her when she became huge. It went through that - and also the framing of her various "break-downs" (in particular they look a lot more explicable if you have a wide lens and see how many paps are surrounding her) through to the conservatorship.

I am convinced and fully on the free Britney wing.

I am really curious if this is actually a system or a highly illegal abuse of the law. Surely it is a criminal offense to force somebody to work and for you to get paid for their labor.

[DGuller]

Does she have mental health issues?  I would think that she would have to have some pretty severe issues for a court to go along with such virtual enslavement of a pretty famous person (it shouldn't matter, but obviously it does).  If she does, then I do wonder how someone would consider it appropriate to conserve her but to still send her out for entertainment.

[Valmy]

I would think that she would have to have some pretty severe issues for a court to go along with such virtual enslavement of a pretty famous person (it shouldn't matter, but obviously it does).

Well for the same reason that giving over custody-ship of a child becomes more problematic if that child happens to have a billion dollar trustfund.

[Sheilbh]

I am really curious if this is actually a system or a highly illegal abuse of the law. Surely it is a criminal offense to force somebody to work and for you to get paid for their labor.

I don't know about illegal - but I think it's definitely an abuse of this process which may have limited circumstances where it's justified.

See the statement by the court-appointed lawyer for her conservatorship (especially that last paragraph):


And he's been getting paid $10k a week by Spears for this (since 2008). According to an email submitted in yesterday's hearing neither he nor the court have any record of his initial appointment including fees of that size. I think the closest it gets was the initial order saying his fees were "not to exceed" $10k a week.

Everything I've read about it makes it seem like it's profoundly dodgy and a maybe unexamined bit of the law that is a way for unscrupulous families and lawyers to basically steal off someone. Spears is illuminating it because she's famous and rich and still working but I wouldn't be surprised if this also covered things like some forms of elder abuse or effectively stealing from someone who genuinely has severe disabilities who has a decent trust to pay for their care etc.

[Eddie Teach]

This reminds me of the movie "I Care a Lot".

[The Larch]

Something that has to be taken into account is that this is not something new, this has been going on since 2008. There are rumours that the conservatorship was only meant to last for a year, but has been going on for more than a decade already.