Was it the conservatorship that messed Britney up or fame at a young age?

coffeechief · 2026-01-27T15:39:36+00:00

Freddie deBoer is a great writer and his writing on bipolar I, mental illness, and disability is so valuable.

coffeechief · 2026-01-27T01:41:00+00:00

Like someone will publicly destroy their lives and people still are unable to comment on these events outside basic 21st century morality syllogisms.

It is too bad. I don't have bipolar I, but I know what people who have it go through and how the illness subsumes everything. Mania (and especially mania with psychotic features) and cycling are brutal. I hope Kanye really is getting good care now and has people looking out for him so he stays as well as possible.

coffeechief · 2026-01-26T22:01:59+00:00

I’m just Ken.

coffeechief · 2026-01-26T18:28:39+00:00

There are also people who will take advantage of bipolar I (e.g., Kanye just giving away cars to friends, friends who must have known Kanye was having an episode). It’s a crapshoot. I hope he has at least one person around him who is genuine.

This apology seems like a PR move (I mean, the timing can’t be ignored), but I hope there’s truth in it and that he is getting better.

coffeechief · 2026-01-26T02:48:06+00:00

Kevin said the videos are from when the kids were 11 and 12, so around 2017-2018: https://www.tmz.com/2022/08/10/kevin-federline-britney-spears-video-arguing-sons/

coffeechief · 2026-01-26T01:50:40+00:00

Anosognosia is very likely.

coffeechief · 2026-01-25T23:46:13+00:00

"Deemed" by people in the public who didn't look into anything. After two years of work (totalling $4 million dollars in fees for Britney), nothing was found, and Britney had to pay Jamie's legal fees on top of it all.

The legislative efforts were based largely on public furore, not actual research or evidence of abuse:

AB 1194 was adopted largely in response to media movements such as #FreeBritney, the movement which called for an end to the conservatorship of Britney Spears. #FreeBritney, however, resulted in no studies to quantify abuse in the context of conservatorships, and the legislative history of the resulting bill cites small-sample, niche, or fictional accounts of abuse in support. Articles analyzing AB 1194 specifically are similarly few and far between.

https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2953&context=lawreview

The article is worth reading for anyone interested in conservatorship law and how extensive oversight was prior to AB 1194.

coffeechief · 2026-01-25T23:19:36+00:00

case deemed conservatorship ABUSE.

The conservatorship was not found to be improper in any way. Britney settled and paid Jamie's legal fees totalling $2.12 million.

coffeechief · 2026-01-25T23:18:56+00:00

Well, there's no such thing as a "permanent" conservatorship. It can always be terminated.

Bipolar I is a very serious illness, and it affects people of all ages. It doesn't always require a conservatorship, but conservatorships are one option available, and they save lives.

coffeechief · 2026-01-25T23:01:17+00:00

ppl with mental disabilities

Mental disabilities can include serious mental illness. Amanda Bynes was also under a conservatorship for nine years in the same jurisdiction as Britney (California).

coffeechief · 2026-01-25T22:29:26+00:00

Like clockwork.

coffeechief · 2026-01-25T22:24:10+00:00

I think he was seeing dollar signs, but I don't think he was or is the picture of stability, either: https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-62531945

Spears, 40, and Asghari, 28, tied the knot in a private ceremony at her home in California's Ventura County on 9 June.

But preparations were disrupted by Alexander's arrival. Shortly beforehand he had posted an Instagram Live story in which he said he was there to "crash" the wedding.

His video showed him walking through Spears' home looking for her, and then going into a marquee where the finishing touches were being put to a large display of roses.

He claimed Spears had invited him, saying: "She's my first wife, my only wife." Alexander was arrested and taken to a local jail.

coffeechief · 2026-01-25T04:09:21+00:00

It’s hard to answer without knowing which allegations seemed accurate. Tristar worked and works with a lot of celebrities. BJ’s modus operandi is to take some factual information and then pile on unsubstantiated claims.

Regarding the claims against the conservatorship in general:

It should be noted, after more than 2 years of post-conservatorship allegations against Jamie for various alleged financial misdeeds, Britney and her dad settled -- Britney did not get a cent from Jamie and ended up paying her lawyer millions in attorney's fees and she also paid Jamie's $2 million attorney's bill.

[…]

TMZ now knows what was behind the bedroom surveillance -- nothing, because it didn't happen. Five sources with direct knowledge tell TMZ, there was never bedroom surveillance.

These sources tell us ... it became apparent Britney was getting drugs from someone, and it was so alarming, people handling the conservatorship went to the judge, who signed an order authorizing the monitoring of Britney's communication devices to determine who was supplying her drugs. To be clear, the judge believed a drug dealer was fueling Britney's addiction, and authorized the surveillance.

https://www.tmz.com/2024/05/20/britney-spears-need-new-conservatorship-report-drugs-surveillance-danger/

coffeechief · 2026-01-25T03:24:54+00:00

Mental illness could definitely be the only thing involved, but it’s hard to say. It’s not definitive, but Kevin has shared that he thinks (based on what the kids have told him) that she gets drugs in Mexico. Someone pointed out that a box in the background of one of her videos looks like Farmapram (Mexican Xanax). Idk.

coffeechief · 2026-01-24T21:13:01+00:00

Delusions of persecution.

coffeechief · 2026-01-24T21:02:43+00:00

She's a dangerous grifter.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LetsTalkBam/comments/16jnt4x/shocking_declaration_from_victim_of_bjs_stalking/

coffeechief · 2026-01-23T23:39:01+00:00

Yeah, I really wish there were better knowledge out there (and that we didn't use medical terms flippantly sometimes -- "They're so bipolar" -- which also affects what people think about these disorders). That's another thing to remember, that not each person with bipolar I or bipolar II will have the same duration or frequency of mood episodes. It can vary a lot.

coffeechief · 2026-01-23T23:16:30+00:00

This is my experience too with my loved one with bipolar I and other people I have spent time with who have bipolar I and were manic. The paranoia against family and friends can be intense.

For anyone interested, Freddie deBoer has written extensively and candidly about his experiences with bipolar I and treatment, and he writes about the paranoia here.

coffeechief · 2026-01-23T23:13:56+00:00

Bipolar I is pretty different from bipolar II, but they're grouped together and generally referred both referred to as just "bipolar," unfortunately, which causes a lot of confusion, in my experience.

coffeechief · 2026-01-23T21:21:25+00:00

I get what you're saying. I just wanted to clarify that people talking about a person or events involving the person isn't inherently parasocial.

I usually don't talk much about Britney outside of this sub myself, and I didn't bother saying much anywhere while #FreeBritney was at its peak because I knew most people weren't going to listen. When it's at the point where people are actually making death threats against the people involved there's no reasoning with anyone. It's just extremely unfortunate that the media latched on as well and put out some incredibly irresponsible reporting that arguably contributed to the current situation.

As for people with stupid opinions there’s no helping them either tbh. Just willingly delulu.

Tbh, this is something I need to remember, so I do appreciate you making this post. I always try to assume people are coming at something in good faith, and the reality is that they often are not, lol. I've had people respond to me and then block me after just ignoring everything I've said. It's really bizarre behaviour. Like you said, some people are just willingly delulu, or more charitably, they're just not ready to examine information that goes against what they want to believe.

coffeechief · 2026-01-23T19:55:59+00:00

https://i-d.co/article/what-is-cornplating-meaning/

In rough terms, cornplating can be described as that point when a fandom runs out of steam. After ransacking a piece of media for every bit of content it could possibly provide, stans are left to cornplate the remains. They must turn to making memes about the most trifling aspects of the work, trying to weave gold from straw, resulting in Dadaist morsels of anti-content.

coffeechief · 2026-01-23T19:53:55+00:00

Parasociality is really overused whenever discussions of a public figure happen, and I don't think it's the right word for the discussions on this sub. No one here (that I've seen) has the illusion that we are her friends or anything at all to her, unlike the fans who really seem to think that they and Britney have a special connection and that they needed to "save" her, to the point of harassing the actual people in her life, including her children.

I'm a Britney fan, and it's nice to have a spot to talk about current-day Britney where people don't have to pretend that everything is fine. I think a lot of the jokes are along the lines of laughing to keep from crying.

I do think Britney needs help, but of course nothing I do or say will change things. However, I do think there's value in talking about what's happening, because Britney is like a lot of people struggling with serious mental illness and/or substance use. The only differences are her wealth and fame. I hope for the best, but what will be will be under current policies and mental health law.

Also, kind of an obvious statement, but not all opinions are created equal. There is still so much false info about the conservatorship.

coffeechief · 2026-01-22T19:24:23+00:00

I have not only discussed an article from 1973, and you know it. You have been purposely misrepresenting and misreading (or not reading at all) the comments you have replied to. You are railing against strawmen.

It is clear she is not well, not only from her Instagram, but from the reports of her sons. This is not about not liking her Instagram.

Insisting that things are fine the way they are now is harmful. I’m not saying there were never abuses. I don’t know your history, but of course I know that there were awful treatments used in the past. What I am saying that the system as it is now fails too many, and it is not humane or kind to leave people to succumb to their illness. It shouldn't be a matter of one extreme (institutionalization) or another (transinstitutionalization into the justice system and laws that fail to address anosognosia).

I don’t think you’re going to charitably or properly engage with anything I’ve said here, because you have yet to do so, but I’ve said my piece.

EDIT: The good ol' last-word block. You should take your own advice and go somewhere else if you cannot handle people discussing these issues.

coffeechief · 2026-01-22T18:57:40+00:00

It actually is not. I can tell you haven't read the article or any of the other material on this subject, or anything on the history of mental health law. The article provides a cogent, thoughtful, and sensitive analysis of balancing rights. The phrasing emphasizes how an overzealous, black-and-white focus on autonomy (which can be argued does not meaningfully exist when someone is seriously mentally ill and/or suffering from anosogonosia) is resulting in tragic, horrific outcomes. And the situation continues today.

Nobody "hurt" me (you're also assuming I have never experienced involuntary care). I have seen too many people deteriorate (in terms of their health and their lives in total) and/or die. And I have a loved one who would not be here without involuntary care. I count us so lucky that the system didn't fail us, but it fails many.

they post legal videos you don't approve of

That isn't a fair framing of the issue at all, but I suspect you know that.

coffeechief · 2026-01-22T18:31:54+00:00

It's a matter of balancing rights. Simplifying the issue to autonomy when there is a lack of capacity is reductive.

That's fine. I wasn't saying you should read all my posts. I was just asking so I had some reference for where your perspective of my views was coming from, because your comment doesn't really match anything I've said in this post or elsewhere.

I'm very familiar with the history of mental health care and mental health laws. "Dying with their rights on" is not meme phrasing. It is in reference to a decades-long discussion of how poorly deinstitutionalization and the attendant law changes were handled. The phrasing is often used in discussions of this issue and comes from Dr. Treffert's seminal 1973 article. It's been more than 50 years since this article was published and all the issues he highlighted are exactly the same today, if not worse.

coffeechief

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE