Framing Britney Spears

[Anonymous]

I just listened to her court appearance. She is not incapacitated. She sounds sure of herself and angry which is normal considering what is going on. She may need protection from hangers on etc but man she is basically a prisoner. I agree that is she was poor she would not be in this situation. She is in this situation because she is wealthy and too many people live off her. This needs to stop asap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just listened to her court appearance. She is not incapacitated. She sounds sure of herself and angry which is normal considering what is going on. She may need protection from hangers on etc but man she is basically a prisoner. I agree that is she was poor she would not be in this situation. She is in this situation because she is wealthy and too many people live off her. This needs to stop asap.

You can't come to any conclusions based on her court appearance.
FFS, I know lawyers who can successfully litigate while high.
We. know. nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An IUD put in against your will is trauma.

She didn’t say it was put in against her will. She said she wants it taken out so it is being KEPT in against her will. Both are traumatic but we should be clear in our statements.

Can’t one just pull it out oneself? I’m pretty sure you can. Are people really checking regularly to see if it’s in?

??? You can stick your entire hand in your vagina and perform surgery on yourself?! You could have a Vegas residency with that act!

Funny, I was just reading a post on another forum by a woman whose abusive boyfriend pulled out her IUD during sex. It's not that complicated.

Not always. Mine had migrated and I needed a procedure to fish it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If she is poor, none of the conservators,lawyers, family members and other parasites would give an F about her best interest. Conservators should not be paid. Why wouldn't any parents look after their kids for free while holding down a real job?

It is pure greed.

Please take care of a seriously incapacitated adult full-time and then report back to us on how things are going doing that for free.

I am not that poster but 100% agree and did take care of my MIL as a legal guardian. I didn't take a dime and took very good care of her. I am surprised as there is a very high threshold to get this type of control and for that long. This makes zero sense. Its for the money/greed not for Britney's best interests. Her Dad uses her for income. They should appoint someone else and put strict limits on how much they are paid if they continue it. This is insane.

[Anonymous]

The best explanation is in the LA Times today.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-06-26/britney-spears-conservatorship-claims-raise-serious-concerns
It really details how an inertia develops. From the article:

Barbara Jagiello has spent more than 40 years as a probate litigator in San Francisco and fought many times to remove restrictions on a person she said didn’t need them. She says the courts usually default to less restriction only when the conservator is someone who “truly cares.”

More often, she sees an inertia develop in these cases that keeps the heavy constraints.

“It’s harder to undo something than to do something,” she said.

In her view, this happens because the probate courtroom can be a cozy place where the judges, investigators, professional conservators, mental health evaluators and attorneys all know one another and carry a certain level of credibility. The conservatee is an outsider, often with the specter of mental illness hanging over them.

“The courts tend to want to get the information from the person who is giving them the most articulate response,” Jagiello said. “The person they signed to take control of this person’s life, they’ve already made a determination that this person is the more reliable source of what’s going on, so it’s kind of predetermined.

“The private fiduciaries show up, they’re well-spoken, they’re coiffed, they’re dressed right, they speak in terms of, ‘Oh, I’m only doing this in the best interest of the conservatee.’”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why she had people watching her undress? She stated the people living with her that also WORK FOR HER watch her very move and that’s what she is trying to escape. There is zero reason for that level of supervision over an adult that they are still forcing to work 7 days a week. Ridiculous.

She’s not well. She’s the same as she was the night the 5150 was called and she barricaded herself in the bedroom with the youngest son. She hasn’t been well in decades. Many of the free Britney supporters are not old enough to remember her behaviors during the meltdown. She was fully capable of talking but she was in the exact same manic state she’s in today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why she had people watching her undress? She stated the people living with her that also WORK FOR HER watch her very move and that’s what she is trying to escape. There is zero reason for that level of supervision over an adult that they are still forcing to work 7 days a week. Ridiculous.

She’s not well. She’s the same as she was the night the 5150 was called and she barricaded herself in the bedroom with the youngest son. She hasn’t been well in decades. Many of the free Britney supporters are not old enough to remember her behaviors during the meltdown. She was fully capable of talking but she was in the exact same manic state she’s in today.

Even if that is the case… Someone who is not profiting financially from the conservatorship should evaluate her, and, if needed, care for her.

And if she’s this unwell, shame on her father for making her work 7 days a week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An IUD put in against your will is trauma.

She didn’t say it was put in against her will. She said she wants it taken out so it is being KEPT in against her will. Both are traumatic but we should be clear in our statements.

Can’t one just pull it out oneself? I’m pretty sure you can. Are people really checking regularly to see if it’s in?

??? You can stick your entire hand in your vagina and perform surgery on yourself?! You could have a Vegas residency with that act!

You have no idea what you're talking about. It's two fingers and a yank on a string. If you can insert an OB tampon you can probably remove your IUD.

And damage your cervix in the process, no thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An IUD put in against your will is trauma.

She didn’t say it was put in against her will. She said she wants it taken out so it is being KEPT in against her will. Both are traumatic but we should be clear in our statements.

Can’t one just pull it out oneself? I’m pretty sure you can. Are people really checking regularly to see if it’s in?

??? You can stick your entire hand in your vagina and perform surgery on yourself?! You could have a Vegas residency with that act!

You have no idea what you're talking about. It's two fingers and a yank on a string. If you can insert an OB tampon you can probably remove your IUD.

Why would you do a procedure on yourself? You could cause damage. A doctor has equipment and can look into your body and remove it safely. Do you do your own fillings, too?

I mean, ideally you wouldn't, but if it's there truly against your will you could, with relative ease. It's less like giving yourself a filling and more like trying to remove your own ingrown hair.

Considering it took my doctor three different attempts at getting it in (and it was very painful), there's no way in hell I would try to take it out by myself. You're crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The best explanation is in the LA Times today.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-06-26/britney-spears-conservatorship-claims-raise-serious-concerns
It really details how an inertia develops. From the article:

Barbara Jagiello has spent more than 40 years as a probate litigator in San Francisco and fought many times to remove restrictions on a person she said didn’t need them. She says the courts usually default to less restriction only when the conservator is someone who “truly cares.”

More often, she sees an inertia develop in these cases that keeps the heavy constraints.

“It’s harder to undo something than to do something,” she said.

In her view, this happens because the probate courtroom can be a cozy place where the judges, investigators, professional conservators, mental health evaluators and attorneys all know one another and carry a certain level of credibility. The conservatee is an outsider, often with the specter of mental illness hanging over them.

“The courts tend to want to get the information from the person who is giving them the most articulate response,” Jagiello said. “The person they signed to take control of this person’s life, they’ve already made a determination that this person is the more reliable source of what’s going on, so it’s kind of predetermined.

“The private fiduciaries show up, they’re well-spoken, they’re coiffed, they’re dressed right, they speak in terms of, ‘Oh, I’m only doing this in the best interest of the conservatee.’”

^And they rob the wards blind!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why she had people watching her undress? She stated the people living with her that also WORK FOR HER watch her very move and that’s what she is trying to escape. There is zero reason for that level of supervision over an adult that they are still forcing to work 7 days a week. Ridiculous.

She’s not well. She’s the same as she was the night the 5150 was called and she barricaded herself in the bedroom with the youngest son. She hasn’t been well in decades. Many of the free Britney supporters are not old enough to remember her behaviors during the meltdown. She was fully capable of talking but she was in the exact same manic state she’s in today.

Manic at best. Psychotic and disordered at worst.

We just don’t know.

Yes a schizophrenic could do the Vegas residency - go out and dance - if everything is taken care of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why she had people watching her undress? She stated the people living with her that also WORK FOR HER watch her very move and that’s what she is trying to escape. There is zero reason for that level of supervision over an adult that they are still forcing to work 7 days a week. Ridiculous.

She’s not well. She’s the same as she was the night the 5150 was called and she barricaded herself in the bedroom with the youngest son. She hasn’t been well in decades. Many of the free Britney supporters are not old enough to remember her behaviors during the meltdown. She was fully capable of talking but she was in the exact same manic state she’s in today.

Manic at best. Psychotic and disordered at worst.

We just don’t know.

Yes a schizophrenic could do the Vegas residency - go out and dance - if everything is taken care of.

And the reality show?

[Anonymous]

You mean the reality show she did in 2005 three years before the conservator ship?
When she was 24?

Can we talk about the age of onset of schizophrenia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why she had people watching her undress? She stated the people living with her that also WORK FOR HER watch her very move and that’s what she is trying to escape. There is zero reason for that level of supervision over an adult that they are still forcing to work 7 days a week. Ridiculous.

She’s not well. She’s the same as she was the night the 5150 was called and she barricaded herself in the bedroom with the youngest son. She hasn’t been well in decades. Many of the free Britney supporters are not old enough to remember her behaviors during the meltdown. She was fully capable of talking but she was in the exact same manic state she’s in today.

This.
Let her have someone else overseeing her conservatorship.. But she shouldn't be responsible for herself, she is not a well woman, despite what her stans want to believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If she is poor, none of the conservators,lawyers, family members and other parasites would give an F about her best interest. Conservators should not be paid. Why wouldn't any parents look after their kids for free while holding down a real job?

It is pure greed.

Please take care of a seriously incapacitated adult full-time and then report back to us on how things are going doing that for free.

I don’t have millions to spend on the parasites.