Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From CNN: “Samuel D. Ingham, a court-appointed attorney who has represented Britney Spears for the entirety of her almost 13-year conservatorship, has submitted a petition to resign from his position, according to a court filing obtained and dated Tuesday by CNN.“

Sounds like people are running scared now. I am so angry for her. It’s clear many more people benefited from this conservatorship than Britney.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From CNN: “Samuel D. Ingham, a court-appointed attorney who has represented Britney Spears for the entirety of her almost 13-year conservatorship, has submitted a petition to resign from his position, according to a court filing obtained and dated Tuesday by CNN.“

Sounds like people are running scared now. I am so angry for her. It’s clear many more people benefited from this conservatorship than Britney.

Anonymous wrote:From CNN: “Samuel D. Ingham, a court-appointed attorney who has represented Britney Spears for the entirety of her almost 13-year conservatorship, has submitted a petition to resign from his position, according to a court filing obtained and dated Tuesday by CNN.“

Anonymous wrote:I read somewhere she locked herself in the bathroom and threatened to drown the baby.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the New Yorker piece. Her dad should be jailed, and every lawyer and the retired judge should be investigated.

The story of her possible postpartum breakdown in 2008-2010 really takes me back to an old job, where I was in my 20s and 30s. The other youngish women were MERCILESS about her, calling her white trash, a bad mother, stupid, a whore, a druggie. I have addiction in my family and didn’t judge in the same way, at all, but it was years before I had a baby, and I never thought of the crippling nature of her life’s pace and hormones colliding to help create a nightmare. The only good thing about reading this story today is my assumption that nasty observations won’t fly anymore, and that she may actually get some freedom with some financial controls if necessary according to a truly neutral assessor.

Team Brit Brit.

Perhaps.

Or, maybe her father is trying to prevent another Amy Winehouse or Lindsay Lohan situation.

It’s a fact she has mental health and addiction issues. It’s a miracle she still has a viable career and assets. Lohan and Winehouse don’t. The difference? The conservatorship.

Both Winehouse and Lohan were very talented. Their issues and lack of protection created their downfall.

Interesting that you mentioned AW and LL since they too have fathers who are shady AF.

And yet Britney remains sober, wealthy, employable, and her brand is protected. See the tangible difference?

And yet her father, with the assistance of the state, is “in her uterus” so to speak. Oh well, as long as she is sober, wealthy, and employable who cares if her reproductive and financial decisions are controlled by men?

She couldn’t even take care of the two,she had, why should she be allowed to have more?

We don’t have minimum requirements to have children in this country. Your statement and question could easily be applied to a not insignificant portion of the population. Are you even serious?

If you’ve seen some of the horrors that I have working with abused children (and some murdered) you would understand why I would prefer everyone to have to have a license proving they are capable of treating children properly.

And what a slippery slope that is… who gets to decide what “treating children properly” means? How do you know you’re treating YOUR kids “properly”?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the New Yorker piece. Her dad should be jailed, and every lawyer and the retired judge should be investigated.

The story of her possible postpartum breakdown in 2008-2010 really takes me back to an old job, where I was in my 20s and 30s. The other youngish women were MERCILESS about her, calling her white trash, a bad mother, stupid, a whore, a druggie. I have addiction in my family and didn’t judge in the same way, at all, but it was years before I had a baby, and I never thought of the crippling nature of her life’s pace and hormones colliding to help create a nightmare. The only good thing about reading this story today is my assumption that nasty observations won’t fly anymore, and that she may actually get some freedom with some financial controls if necessary according to a truly neutral assessor.

Team Brit Brit.

Perhaps.

Or, maybe her father is trying to prevent another Amy Winehouse or Lindsay Lohan situation.

It’s a fact she has mental health and addiction issues. It’s a miracle she still has a viable career and assets. Lohan and Winehouse don’t. The difference? The conservatorship.

Both Winehouse and Lohan were very talented. Their issues and lack of protection created their downfall.

Interesting that you mentioned AW and LL since they too have fathers who are shady AF.

And yet Britney remains sober, wealthy, employable, and her brand is protected. See the tangible difference?

And yet her father, with the assistance of the state, is “in her uterus” so to speak. Oh well, as long as she is sober, wealthy, and employable who cares if her reproductive and financial decisions are controlled by men?

She couldn’t even take care of the two,she had, why should she be allowed to have more?

We don’t have minimum requirements to have children in this country. Your statement and question could easily be applied to a not insignificant portion of the population. Are you even serious?

If you’ve seen some of the horrors that I have working with abused children (and some murdered) you would understand why I would prefer everyone to have to have a license proving they are capable of treating children properly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the New Yorker piece. Her dad should be jailed, and every lawyer and the retired judge should be investigated.

The story of her possible postpartum breakdown in 2008-2010 really takes me back to an old job, where I was in my 20s and 30s. The other youngish women were MERCILESS about her, calling her white trash, a bad mother, stupid, a whore, a druggie. I have addiction in my family and didn’t judge in the same way, at all, but it was years before I had a baby, and I never thought of the crippling nature of her life’s pace and hormones colliding to help create a nightmare. The only good thing about reading this story today is my assumption that nasty observations won’t fly anymore, and that she may actually get some freedom with some financial controls if necessary according to a truly neutral assessor.

Team Brit Brit.

Perhaps.

Or, maybe her father is trying to prevent another Amy Winehouse or Lindsay Lohan situation.

It’s a fact she has mental health and addiction issues. It’s a miracle she still has a viable career and assets. Lohan and Winehouse don’t. The difference? The conservatorship.

Both Winehouse and Lohan were very talented. Their issues and lack of protection created their downfall.

Interesting that you mentioned AW and LL since they too have fathers who are shady AF.

And yet Britney remains sober, wealthy, employable, and her brand is protected. See the tangible difference?

And yet her father, with the assistance of the state, is “in her uterus” so to speak. Oh well, as long as she is sober, wealthy, and employable who cares if her reproductive and financial decisions are controlled by men?

She couldn’t even take care of the two,she had, why should she be allowed to have more?

We don’t have minimum requirements to have children in this country. Your statement and question could easily be applied to a not insignificant portion of the population. Are you even serious?

If you’ve seen some of the horrors that I have working with abused children (and some murdered) you would understand why I would prefer everyone to have to have a license proving they are capable of treating children properly.

Britney never abused her kids. Did you read the New Yorker article? She was a good mom, caught up in a custody battle. She was NURSING her infant and not allowed to see him.

No, just no.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the New Yorker piece. Her dad should be jailed, and every lawyer and the retired judge should be investigated.

The story of her possible postpartum breakdown in 2008-2010 really takes me back to an old job, where I was in my 20s and 30s. The other youngish women were MERCILESS about her, calling her white trash, a bad mother, stupid, a whore, a druggie. I have addiction in my family and didn’t judge in the same way, at all, but it was years before I had a baby, and I never thought of the crippling nature of her life’s pace and hormones colliding to help create a nightmare. The only good thing about reading this story today is my assumption that nasty observations won’t fly anymore, and that she may actually get some freedom with some financial controls if necessary according to a truly neutral assessor.

Team Brit Brit.

Perhaps.

Or, maybe her father is trying to prevent another Amy Winehouse or Lindsay Lohan situation.

It’s a fact she has mental health and addiction issues. It’s a miracle she still has a viable career and assets. Lohan and Winehouse don’t. The difference? The conservatorship.

Both Winehouse and Lohan were very talented. Their issues and lack of protection created their downfall.

Interesting that you mentioned AW and LL since they too have fathers who are shady AF.

And yet Britney remains sober, wealthy, employable, and her brand is protected. See the tangible difference?

And yet her father, with the assistance of the state, is “in her uterus” so to speak. Oh well, as long as she is sober, wealthy, and employable who cares if her reproductive and financial decisions are controlled by men?

She couldn’t even take care of the two,she had, why should she be allowed to have more?

We don’t have minimum requirements to have children in this country. Your statement and question could easily be applied to a not insignificant portion of the population. Are you even serious?

If you’ve seen some of the horrors that I have working with abused children (and some murdered) you would understand why I would prefer everyone to have to have a license proving they are capable of treating children properly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the New Yorker piece. Her dad should be jailed, and every lawyer and the retired judge should be investigated.

The story of her possible postpartum breakdown in 2008-2010 really takes me back to an old job, where I was in my 20s and 30s. The other youngish women were MERCILESS about her, calling her white trash, a bad mother, stupid, a whore, a druggie. I have addiction in my family and didn’t judge in the same way, at all, but it was years before I had a baby, and I never thought of the crippling nature of her life’s pace and hormones colliding to help create a nightmare. The only good thing about reading this story today is my assumption that nasty observations won’t fly anymore, and that she may actually get some freedom with some financial controls if necessary according to a truly neutral assessor.

Team Brit Brit.

Perhaps.

Or, maybe her father is trying to prevent another Amy Winehouse or Lindsay Lohan situation.

It’s a fact she has mental health and addiction issues. It’s a miracle she still has a viable career and assets. Lohan and Winehouse don’t. The difference? The conservatorship.

Both Winehouse and Lohan were very talented. Their issues and lack of protection created their downfall.

Interesting that you mentioned AW and LL since they too have fathers who are shady AF.

And yet Britney remains sober, wealthy, employable, and her brand is protected. See the tangible difference?

And yet her father, with the assistance of the state, is “in her uterus” so to speak. Oh well, as long as she is sober, wealthy, and employable who cares if her reproductive and financial decisions are controlled by men?

She couldn’t even take care of the two,she had, why should she be allowed to have more?

We don’t have minimum requirements to have children in this country. Your statement and question could easily be applied to a not insignificant portion of the population. Are you even serious?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the New Yorker piece. Her dad should be jailed, and every lawyer and the retired judge should be investigated.

The story of her possible postpartum breakdown in 2008-2010 really takes me back to an old job, where I was in my 20s and 30s. The other youngish women were MERCILESS about her, calling her white trash, a bad mother, stupid, a whore, a druggie. I have addiction in my family and didn’t judge in the same way, at all, but it was years before I had a baby, and I never thought of the crippling nature of her life’s pace and hormones colliding to help create a nightmare. The only good thing about reading this story today is my assumption that nasty observations won’t fly anymore, and that she may actually get some freedom with some financial controls if necessary according to a truly neutral assessor.

Team Brit Brit.

Perhaps.

Or, maybe her father is trying to prevent another Amy Winehouse or Lindsay Lohan situation.

It’s a fact she has mental health and addiction issues. It’s a miracle she still has a viable career and assets. Lohan and Winehouse don’t. The difference? The conservatorship.

Both Winehouse and Lohan were very talented. Their issues and lack of protection created their downfall.

Interesting that you mentioned AW and LL since they too have fathers who are shady AF.

And yet Britney remains sober, wealthy, employable, and her brand is protected. See the tangible difference?

And yet her father, with the assistance of the state, is “in her uterus” so to speak. Oh well, as long as she is sober, wealthy, and employable who cares if her reproductive and financial decisions are controlled by men?

She couldn’t even take care of the two,she had, why should she be allowed to have more?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read the New Yorker piece. Her dad should be jailed, and every lawyer and the retired judge should be investigated.

The story of her possible postpartum breakdown in 2008-2010 really takes me back to an old job, where I was in my 20s and 30s. The other youngish women were MERCILESS about her, calling her white trash, a bad mother, stupid, a whore, a druggie. I have addiction in my family and didn’t judge in the same way, at all, but it was years before I had a baby, and I never thought of the crippling nature of her life’s pace and hormones colliding to help create a nightmare. The only good thing about reading this story today is my assumption that nasty observations won’t fly anymore, and that she may actually get some freedom with some financial controls if necessary according to a truly neutral assessor.

Team Brit Brit.

Perhaps.

Or, maybe her father is trying to prevent another Amy Winehouse or Lindsay Lohan situation.

It’s a fact she has mental health and addiction issues. It’s a miracle she still has a viable career and assets. Lohan and Winehouse don’t. The difference? The conservatorship.

Both Winehouse and Lohan were very talented. Their issues and lack of protection created their downfall.

Interesting that you mentioned AW and LL since they too have fathers who are shady AF.

And yet Britney remains sober, wealthy, employable, and her brand is protected. See the tangible difference?

And yet her father, with the assistance of the state, is “in her uterus” so to speak. Oh well, as long as she is sober, wealthy, and employable who cares if her reproductive and financial decisions are controlled by men?