JULIA SPENCER-FLEMING: We don’t usually do celebrity gossip here on JRW, but I’ve been following the #FreeBritney movement since it burst the banks and spilled over into public protests and a new hearing for Ms. Spears. I’m curious as to everyone’s take on it. It seems unbelievable to me that a woman can have a mental health issue (brought on by enormous pressure, stress, and a crappy personal life) and 14 years later STILL have her money, body and actions controlled by men appointed by a judge (another man, I might add.) It sounds like something out of the Victorian age, when men could put their wives/mothers/daughters away in asylums just by writing the order.
Many people have pointed out that many male celebrities have displayed behavior far more alarming than Britney Spears’ flailing and head shaving back in 2008: Charlie Sheen, Michael Jackson and Kanye West come to mind. Nonetheless, both in Hollywood and on Main Street, women bear the brunt of conservatorships, in part because they’re most frequently used for the elderly.
From 2008 until 2019, Britney Spears' co-conservators were her father and the perhaps appropriately-named Andrew Wallet. Ms. Spears was given no say in who ran her massive business and financial dealings, or in decisions made about her own body - she has said in court she was forced to diet, perform, and have an IUD implanted, all against her will.
In 2019, Britney announced she was taking a hiatus from performing. Mr Wallet stepped down from his $426,000 a year job (he got a $100,000 bonus upon “retirement.”) At the same time, her father handed the role of co-conservator to Jodi Montgomery, a professional fiduciary conservator who seems to have her client’s support in the role (she was previously Britney’s “care manager,” an undefined term that may have included informal counseling, as Montgomery has a degree in social welfare.) Needless to say, Spear’s father has retained control of her multi-million dollar estate.
This past Wednesday. Britney was finally granted the motion to be represented by an attorney she selected, after the longtime court-appointed lawyer withdrew. Bessemer Trust, the recently-appointed co-financial conservator, has also withdrawn, publicly stating the company will not proceed in its role since Spears has made it obvious she doesn't want to be in a conservatorship. The ACLU has filed a request to weigh in on her case in an amicus brief. This may be the beginning of the end of Britney Spears’ long, legal, incarceration.
Thoughts, Reds?
RHYS BOWEN: she wouldn’t be the first celeb to have been taken advantage of by controlling and greedy relatives. My feeling is that if she is not harming herself or her children ( does she have custody of children?) then it is her right to do what she wants with her assets. It does remind me of my Molly Murphy books when a husband and doctor could sign a woman into an asylum for life!
I’m not a fan of any decision for a woman being made by men!
JULIA: Rhys, apparently her ex got full custody of her kids during her 2008 breakdown, and it was later readjusted to 50/50. Despite making a career of nibbling the edges of B-list reality TV, Kevin Federline has by all accounts been an excellent father to the boys.
JENN McKINLAY: I watched the documentary Framing Britney Spears in horrified fascination. That a person can be that talented, work that hard, and have someone else decide they’re unfit and take all of her autonomy away. Bloody terrifying! And it’s a system that is so easily manipulated and corrupt. I’m with Rhys! I’m not a fan of any decision being made for a woman by a bunch of men, especially men who are making a stinking fortune keeping her under their collective thumb. #FreeBritney
LUCY BURDETTE: I’m in with #FreeBritney! Should we get together and storm the castle?
DEBORAH CROMBIE: I haven’t watched the documentary yet, but I am beyond horrified at the idea of these men controlling her life--and raking in her money!!! Unbelievable!
HANK PHILLIPPI RYAN: (We don't do celebrity gossip? Aw.) And yes, this is tragic, and the CLOTHES she wears, I've got to hope those aren't her idea either. (I know, I'm a fogey.) But have you read the amazing and powerful book THE WOMAN THEY COULD NOT SILENCE by Kate Moore? It's incredible (non-fiction), about how the laws have been used for centuries to shut women up and control their money. And when they complain or fight back, that just made them deemed crazier. I haven't seen the doc--should I watch it?
HALLIE EPHRON: I haven’t seen the documentary either, only read about it. Having grown up in a truly dysfunctional household, I keep thinking about her children and what an ordeal all the publicity and 
controversy must be for them. And while I’m outraged on Britney’s behalf, I wonder if the documentary-makers are ‘using’ her in their own way. Shades of Princess Diana. Marilyn. Judy Garland.
JULIA: I agree with Hallie - while the documentary has been hugely important in bringing awareness to her cause, there's also an aspect of "yet another group of people making money off of Britney Spears." I wonder if it's inevitable when an entire business centers around a single person, or if it's more likely to happen when that person is a woman instead of a man. (Perhaps contrast the new documentary by and about Val Kilmer, which gives him a chance to tell his story his way.)
What do you think, dear readers?
Can I just point out that Britney’s father used two million dollars of Britney’s money to pay his for his own defense? Doesn’t that make it pretty obvious that this conservatorship has absolutely nothing to do with actually taking care of the singer [which, I hasten to add, I’m not at all certain she truly needs] . . . rather it’s about what others can misappropriate/grab/steal for themselves.
ReplyDeleteIt is a travesty that the men get to control every aspect of Britney’s life . . . .
I’m glad she’s finally getting her own lawyer . . . now, may it finally be decided solely on what’s best for Britney . . . .
Absolutely, Joan. I also read a comment by an entertainment journalist that Britney is worth about $60million, which sounds impressive until you know her peers - performers who have been putting out music and shows at the same rate - have fortunes in the three digits. As the reporter said, where is the other 40 million she ought to have in the bank?
DeleteIn agreement with all. It's an outrage and a nightmare. #freebritney
ReplyDeleteShalom Reds and fans,
ReplyDeleteI have not followed Britney Spears or been aware of her situation until these recent news cycles. I don’t really know much of the facts in the case but my gut tells me that she is being taken advantage of financially and otherwise and should be given back full control of her own money and the decision-making power in her life.
That being said, I have a friend who’s daughter lives in a group home. I am sure my friend pays a lot of money for her care in a variety of ways. His daughter is no longer young. She has more gray hair than me. The pictures that I have seen of her always show her with a flat affect. She doesn’t smile or laugh. She does not cry. My friend and his wife visit her on weekends and take her out for a day on the town. She apparently loves these visits and when it is time to go back to the group home, she fights it and always feels abandoned.
I’ve known this friend since we were in nursery school together. (I have no independent recollection of this part of my life.) He is now a tenured professor of law at a well-known university. I am sure he has a durable power of attorney on behalf of his daughter and also that he has tried to make available resources for his daughter in his will, should he die.
It’s a bittersweet situation, but in the best of cases, this is what families do. They look out for one another.
Oh, David, that's so hard for your friend. There comes a time when every parent of an adult child with mental disabilities or debilitating disorders has to relinquish personal care of that child. Some do it when their kid is 21, others not until death. I doubt there's ever any perfect decision.
DeleteThe irony is, in most states, the kind of group home your friend's daughter is in is much more heavily regulated than conservatorships. In Maine, for instance, they fall under the aegis of the Department of Health and Human Services; they are licensed, subject to inspection, and have regulations on their administration, staffing - even the food they offer the residents. And, of course, they also have a stopgap, because the family and friends of people in those group homes can and do raise complaints if necessary. None of those safeguards exist in most state conservatorships.
Remember the countries where women weren't allowed to own property or have their own bank accounts or credit cards? Not so long ago. The fact that a woman isn't allowed to manage her own financial and legal affairs because daddy said so is medieval, and yet, men making decisions about a woman's body is front row and center politics. Go, Britney, Go!
ReplyDeleteRight, Margaret! Still happening.
DeleteIn the mid-1970s when I first applied for a credit card in my own name my application was declined because the application was in my name and not my husband's. The bank that denied the card held my personal accounts and I was the sole support of my family.
DeleteI remember those countries, Margaret. Like . . . the United States? My mother had to have her father co-sign to get a credit card after her divorce in 1974. She was 48 and had a full-time job. And women couldn't own property in Texas until well into the 20th century.
DeleteYes! My mother was a young widow in the early 60s and she had to get her father to cosign the mortgage for her house, despite the fact she had more than enough assets and demonstrated income. She didn't have a credit card in her own name until 1979.
DeleteIt is outrageous that her freedom was taken away from her so long ago and they are just reviewing it now. If we had all been aware of this would we have spoken sooner? Her struggle makes me sad.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with everything Rhys said about a historic and terrifying abuse. That is why it is so rare to learn about powerful, independent women in past centuries. And witch trials. And entailed properties. And religious rules against a woman leading a service or specifically, reading the Torah. Gah!
Agreed, Judy.
DeleteJulia, I forgot you were a lawyer until I read this. Well done.
ReplyDeleteI have not been following the Britney Spears case except to scan the highlights so I cannot weigh in on this matter. From what little I have seen, it appears she is the family cash cow and they are fearful that she is about to bolt the pasture. It's sad, and that kind of thing has a long history with child stars. I hope that she is able to gain some control over her funds, and full control over her life and body. She has worked hard to regain her mental health, and while it is most likely a work in progress, isn't it for all of us!
Kait, thank you. I just checked - she started her independent career as a singer when she was 15. That's a LONG time to be supporting your whole family and a bunch of hangers-on.
DeleteAlthough I haven't followed this closely what I have seen and heard has outraged me! Men controlling women is something we really have to fight against. We know it is happening now all over the world but it wasn't too long ago that women in this country did not have the same rights as men. We could not get credit in our own name, we could not served on juries, our health insurance cost more, and on and on. Seems like everything has been an uphill battle. The only thing I can think of is for all of us to speak out, and to support women who run for office.
ReplyDeleteJudi, it is an uphill battle, and it continues. I'm hopeful the even-more-widespread publicity around Britney will eventually lead to reforms in the adult conservator world.
DeleteAs several have mentioned, much worse behavior has been seen in various male celebrities and no one put them in a conservatorship, forced psychiatric 'reviews' on them, or interfered with their ability to procreate if they so chose. It just makes me so damned tired and frustrated and angry for us all.
ReplyDeleteI think adults should enjoy the full range of adult freedoms, including the right to screw up their lives if those are the choices they make. If Kanye can be mentally unstable and run for president without a conservatorship, Britney ought to be able to have her IUD removed.
DeleteAmen!
DeleteI think one thing everyone is missing while piling on about it being men doing the controlling in the case of Britney Spears is that the decisions themselves are horrible. Would those decisions have been any less horrible if women were in charge of the conservatorship? I think not. Bad is bad.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, from what I've read in the news reports, it is clear that her father is a complete and utter scumbag who deserves to be imprisoned much like he's apparently done to his daughter. Except he should be in gen pop with no special protections. See how he likes being literally screwed as much as he's been doing.
When the conservatorship first went into effect, it was clear she needed to be protected from herself but what has also become quite clear the last couple of years is that it has long since become something far different and more insidious than what the original intent was for.
That's an important distinction, Jay - when I get angry at the men doing this, I'm thinking of the judge who has let this go on for years, and the lawyers and professional bag holders like Wallet.
DeleteIt's pretty clear Britney was the main revenue stream for her family, and when she had a breakdown at 27 (after working professionally since she was 11) her father panicked the gravy train was derailing. I also imagine it might have felt like a relief for a 27 year old dealing with divorce, child custody and a stressful career to have someone else take over all those decisions for her. Obviously, it's a lot less palatable to a grown woman pushing 40.
You hear about child actors whose parents take all the money when the kids are earning, and dump them, broke and not so cute anymore, when they reach legal age. Looks like Britney's father has found a way to keep her in infantile suspension forever. It's horrible. #FreeBritney!
ReplyDeleteGigi, what's even more appalling is that child performers have more protection than Britney does. One of my nephews is a professional film and TV actor; his earnings go into a trust account and my sister has to submit detailed financial records about anything she might spend on his behalf. (Actually, she's saving his money for college, so she only spends her own money for travel, headshots, etc. If he were earning "regular at the Mickey Mouse Club" money, it would be a different story - but she'd still be required to document everything.)
DeleteI didn't realize that. Apparently stealing from children was more common than I thought, if there are now union regs to protect the kids. Poor Brit. She's an adult. She should be able to take care of her own business any way she chooses, even if she did want to blow it all on drugs and bad haircuts. Clearly she has better sense than that now.
DeleteJulia, the reason your sister has to do that is because child actors were routinely ripped off by their parents, from the beginning of Hollywood (and of course earlier on the stage, but the sums and fame there were both smaller). Jackie Coogan, star of smash hit The Kid with Charlie Chaplin, was one the first to discover that his parents had spent all his money; he sued them in 1938 and in 1939 the Coogan Law was established. There were many loopholes (Shirley Temple's mother also spent her money, etc.) that have been gradually closed over the decades.
DeleteI think it is a terrible situation where the parent victimizes his own child. May I suggest you watch a Netflix movie or limited series that will absolutely horrify you? "I Care a Lot" starring Rosamund Pike is about the practice of becoming a legal guardian or conservator of people deemed "at risk" which may be nothing more than being retired and living alone. A legal guardian can swoop in and put the victim in a nursing home, sell all the assets, and drain the proceeds. It made my skin crawl, watching this movie.
ReplyDeletePat, I read the reviews of I CARE A LOT and I honestly found it so disturbing I decided not to watch it! I was thinking of cases like that when I wrote this post, however (absent the Russin mobster angle, of course)
DeleteAt first, I thought it might be good to have somebody other than herself in charge of her money, to prevent her from throwing it all away. But, that was early on, when she was having serious mental issues. But, fourteen years later I wonder if her father ever had her best interests in mind. That these men should have made millions off of her is outrageous. That she doesn't have control over her own body is outrageous. That she has to perform according to when they want her to is outrageous. As already mentioned, there have been plenty of men celebrities who have exhibited questionable mental capacities, and nobody took all their rights away. At this point, I don't care if she would decide to give all her money to the Performing Monkeys Home, it should be her decision.
ReplyDeleteAs Joan said above, the fact her father spent 2 million out of HER estate to defend himself against her efforts to remove him tells you all you need to know.
DeleteI've got to admit, I didn't realize she was as old as she was. For some reason, I was thinking she was early 20's when she had her breakdown in 2008. Like 20, 21. Instead she was late 20's.
ReplyDeleteEven then, I could see someone stepping in for six months or so until she got back on her feet. But all these years later? No way!
And yes, I do think some of the male celebs who have had breakdowns should be subjected to the same thing when they are having their very public breakdowns. But again, six months. And those in charge get a very small amount of money for their work so as not to make them want to keep it in place. Something like $1000 a year.
I was surprised as well, Mark! Britney Spears was the poop singer my kids listened to; in my head she was still a twenty-something. I was appalled to see she was going to turn 40 later this year.
DeleteI agree with you, in a case with a supportive, caring family, this should have been something that guarded her assets and her health until she got back on her feet - like six months to a year. With a firm limit set on how much they can compensate themselves, like the law does for executors of estates.
Oh, good God. Pop singer. POP singer. :-P
DeleteMy nieces have been sharing info on this exploitation, and yes, it does remind me of Victorian era treatment of inconvenieint women. Insidious forces seem consistently at work to curtail others' liberty, and especially so for women. Solidarity may be our only defense to maintain the gains we've made. At least they aren't hanging us as witches now . . .
ReplyDeletePat D. makes a good point, which was the plot of a book by Sue Grafton, I think, the care givers taking over and holding the patient hostage. I've made one niece my medical POA and am setting another in charge of finances should I become unable.
It's a smart thing to think about ahead of time, Mary!
DeleteOh, I didn't know about the Val Kilmer documentary. It's now on my list!
ReplyDeleteI haven't seen it yet, but it looks fantastic.
DeleteIf she is well enough to work to earn them money, she is well enough to manage her own affairs. What caring father would want his daughter performing in shows if she wasn't well? I guess this is part of how no one really knows how to handle mental problems. I hope Britney and anyone else having problems gets real help and not taken advantage of.
ReplyDeleteAn excellent point, Sally. She's not well enough to make decisions about her body, but she's well enough to rehearse and perform multiple shows over the past 13 years, both on tour and in Vegas.
DeleteIt's vile that her freedoms have been shredded by the greed of others, especially people who should have protected her. My only "celebrity" experience was working with Mary Jo Eustace, when she was contributing an essay to my anthology, The Other Woman. She wrote about her husband leaving her for Tori Spelling. This happened only weeks after they had adopted a little girl. Mary Jo did a few bookstore readings with other authors from the book and the audience was always mesmerized...and outraged.
ReplyDelete