The fight to #freeBritney is a step toward reform

N/A

It’s not clear how many people may be suffering from the legal restraints that were supposed to protect them.

The legal battle that pop star Britney Spears is engaged in for her financial freedom has the nation talking about whether to #freeBritney from her conservatorship. But it’s probably time for the rules that govern these legal tools — which are only discussed when public figures like Spears claim to be a victim of them — to get their own day in court.

A conservatorship or guardianship is a legal relationship giving someone, or multiple people, the authority to make decisions on behalf of an incompetent or incapacitated person. That control and decision-making include oversight of an individual’s finances, estate and health care decisions.

If you’ve had someone close to you suffering from dementia or Alzheimer’s disease or with mental illnesses or disabilities, you’re likely familiar with the emotional process of securing a durable power of attorney, which gives a third party the right to do things on behalf of a person who can’t do them for themselves. If an individual doesn’t have this protection and becomes unable to manage their personal or business affairs, that’s when they may be declared incompetent in court, resulting in a court-appointed guardian or conservator.

In 2008, Spears’ father was granted conservatorship after she suffered a public breakdown and was subsequently checked into a psychiatric facility. She was 26 at the time; she’ll be 40 in December.

These legal tools are important options for the roughly 1.3 million Americans who have disabilities. The trouble with conservatorships seems to come not when someone suffers from a permanent or progressive condition, but when their health or mental status is in flux.

Changing or ending conservatorships are difficult because they are bound by law. Tangible proof must be presented to the presiding judge to show that the protected person has been restored to sufficient health to manage their own affairs. Courts are generally worried about removing the restraints and having the individual or someone else be harmed, according to estate attorneys.

It’s not clear how many people may be suffering from the legal restraints that were supposed to protect them.

Spears testified in June that she proves that she’s a high-performing individual every day because she choreographs dances for her shows, employs others and makes millions of dollars a year performing. She also claimed abuse and conflict of interest by her father.

Judge Brenda Penny has denied Spears’ request to have her father removed from the control of her conservatorship, but the judge allowed her to hire a new lawyer to continue fighting the restrictions.

There are signs that Spears’ 13-year conservatorship case could spark change. Federal legislation has been proposed by Reps. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., and Charlie Crist, D-Fla., to establish safeguards for individuals under guardianships and prevent abuse and exploitation. The measure would provide a person subject to a conservatorship with a caseworker to monitor for signs of abuse and to advise them of their rights.

Calling it a solid first step toward conservatorship reform, Mace said the changes would “give anyone in a conservatorship the right to petition the court for a public guardian with absolutely no conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.”