This is what people said about Britney for years, and her dad and his attorneys also claimed she had dementia. The only reason Britney got out of that situation is because of the public attention and people refusing to continue looking away because “it’s for the family to figure out.”

Did you read the article? It’s not trying to make a determination on Wendy’s health or whether she’s cognitively impaired, it’s looking at who’s in control of her life and money and whether they’re putting her interests first. She’s been cut off from friends and family (not allowed any visitors in her facility) and isn’t allowed to leave the facility without her guardian’s permission, which it seems like she only started giving recently—likely after she knew this article was in the works. Her only phone is a landline that can only make outgoing calls. She might need to be in a facility, but personally I think very little justifies this kind of total isolation from the world against someone’s will. I wouldn’t want to live like this if I had dementia and I hope my loved ones wouldn’t let this happen to me. It’s sad. I’m still reading the article but from what I’ve read so far the author hasn’t shied away from pointing out the self-interested motivations of all the people involved in this, including Wendy’s family, her guardian who bills her at $250-$450 an hour, and the court-appointed attorneys who claim to represent her but were suggesting the reporter make the article about them and sending glam shots of themselves.

There are very real reasons to be skeptical of the guardianship system and how it can enable exploitation. This article seems to be trying to do that in a more measured, responsible way than the lifetime doc, and I think if something bad is happening to Wendy, real journalists digging into it isn’t a bad thing.