https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElXi7yDHyWo&t=3s
Posted on 06/28/2021 4:09:55 AM PDT by Kaslin
When Britney Spears testified that she’s on birth control against her will, abortion activists championed her case in the name of “reproductive freedom” and “bodily autonomy.” But pro-life figures recognized it as something else: a “severe human rights abuse.”
On June 23, the pop star made headlines after pleading with a Los Angeles Superior Court judge to end the conservatorship that has placed her under her father’s control for the past 13 years. In 2008, after Britney suffered from a public breakdown, Jamie Spears legally assumed control of his daughter’s life and finances. His involvement continued as she released new albums and even performed during a Las Vegas residency. For years, Britney has fought to break free. Now, her struggle is receiving renewed attention.
One of Britney’s more shocking statements came when she told Judge Brenda Penny that she isn’t allowed to have another child.
“I want to have the real deal, I want to be able to get married and have a baby,” the 39-year-old star said. “I was told right now in the conservatorship, I’m not able to get married or have a baby. I have an IUD inside of myself right now so I don’t get pregnant. I wanted to take the IUD out so I could start trying to have another baby. But this so-called team won’t let me go to the doctor to take it out because they don’t want me to have children — any more children. So basically, this conservatorship is doing me way more harm than good.”
Since then, legal experts have confirmed that Britney’s situation is possible – and legal – under a conservatorship.
“Technically, they’re in control of all facets of her life, so yes, it is legal,” attorney Sarah J. Wentz, a partner at the firm Fox Rothschild, who specializes in conservatorships, told Variety on June 25.
In response to Britney’s statement, abortion activists claimed her cause as their own in the name of “reproductive freedom” – and tied it to abortion “rights.”
“Everyone has the right to make these most intimate of decisions of if and when to have children,” Ruth Dawson, the principal policy associate at Guttmacher Institute, told Refinery29 on June 24. “Forcing someone to be on birth control against their will is a violation of basic human rights and bodily autonomy, just as forcing someone to become or stay pregnant against their will would be.”
NARAL added in a tweet on June 23, “The freedom to choose if, when, and how to start or grow a family is the core of reproductive freedom. To deny someone that choice is a violation of their most fundamental freedoms.”
Likewise, Alexis McGill Johnson, the president of Planned Parenthood, announced that same day, “We stand in solidarity with Britney and all women who face reproductive coercion.”
“Your reproductive health is your own — and no one should make decisions about it for you,” she said.
But pro-life advocates stressed that Britney’s case isn’t a “pro-choice” issue or related to abortion. According to Catholic priest Fr. Matthew P. Schneider, “Forcing a woman to wear an IUD when she wants a child is neither pro-life nor ‘pro-choice.’”
He called Britney’s situation “horrendous” and recognized it as “some weird form of modern slavery.”
“If Brittney Spears is well enough to perform on stage, which she has done, she's well enough not to be under conservatorship,” he tweeted on June 23. As a priest who identifies as autistic, he saw it as an issue of “disability rights.”
“If a person is well enough to hold a job (let alone headline a Vegas show), they don't need conservatorship! Conservatorship is meant for those completely unable to take care of themselves in any way, like for a parent with dimentia & a few months to live,” he added.
“It's oppressive when those above you won't let you have children, whether it's the Chinese state with their 1 or 2 child policies or Brittney Spears' dad forcing her to wear an IUD against her will,” he tweeted.
Lila Rose, the president of pro-life group Live Action, also spoke up.
“Why has the state of California been enabling this woman’s abusers?” she asked on June 24. “What Britney is enduring is criminal.”
“Forcing someone to have an IUD stuck in their body is a severe human rights abuse,” she added in another tweet. “No rationale ever justifies it, and using mental health or disability as an excuse is an added injustice.”
It’s barbaric to control another human person’s body – her fertility – with forced birth control. But opposing that should be incomparable to supporting abortion, which always ends a human life.
*eye roll*, over your choice of photo.
LOL!
I never knew U were one 2. : )
As someone with a mentally ill relative, I find this case disturbing. One of the things disturbing is how many people openly speak of allowing the mentally ill to make life altering decisions as if they weren’t mentally ill.
Being able to perform on a stage doesn’t shout out to me that this is someone able to take care of herself. Maybe it is and if that’s the case, she has to convince a psychiatric team that she’s able to be independent.
3xactly. Being on stage, doing the same routine day after day IS NO Showing the ability to handle yourself day to day living. Let alone raise a child. Kids get sick, ask unscripted questions, fall, cut themselves, poop themselves, get stubborn, wont eat their vegtablea. All of this isnt rehearsed!!
I’m gonna say no. It’s the other way around, I understand you have family circumstances. But burden of proof about someone who should have freedom taken from them should not be to prove that they are sane. The burden of proof should be rightly on those who legally desire conservatoship.
I don’t understand this story. Why doesn’t she just quit performing?
I think we’ve all forgotten the death spiral she was in. She had NUMEROUS encounters with police that ended with her on 5150 holds. And, these encounters often involved incidents where she was acting unpredictably with her children in her home. There’s a reason that even before this conservatorship was initiated, she had already lost custody of her children and in fact, was only allowed SUPERVISED visits. She was in real danger of being institutionalized on a more permanent basis. The conservatorship was a way to allow her to avoid institutionalized care.
Britney Spears has profound mental health issues. Those issues don’t remediate themselves. They’re life-long. While I agree there is ample evidence that stewards of her conservatorship may need additional oversight from the court or changed altogether, I don’t think anyone should forget how she got where she is.
I read a little about this. Spears works 7 days a week, 10 hours a day. She is not allowed to turn down any appearance or she is labeled “uncooperative” and threatened with changing/upping medication. She is not allowed to pick her own attorneys or doctor. She’s not allowed artistic freedom, if she objects to a dance move, she is again labeled “uncooperative” and threatened. She earns millions yearly and is, in effect, paying her jailers. Why would they free her?
Effectively, she has.
Her father has claimed in the court documents that Britnney has dementia. This is demonstrably false. If you keep to the technicalities of the case you can see what they are doing to her.
Once diagnosed they kept her doped. While doped she could not demonstrate competency. Her attorney has been paid by the conservatorship. I believe that her father ‘s strategy is at long last failing.
As you read comments on her case, take note of those who are ignorant of her fortune in the perfume business. That is where the money is. Discount those who believe that her musical career has anything whatsoever to do with it.
Y ou may also discount those who make generalized statements about mental illness or celebrity parents. The particulars of her case are not secret. If I may be permitted to offer a generalization, with respect, there can be no constitutional right of any kind without protection against the mere allegation of “mental illness.”
The sad thing is a paranoid Schizophrenic and there is no cure .
Her medicine or cocktail stopped working so she was retired .
No one will insure her show.
Now she is off her meds and out of control .
Her latest Gold Digger boyfriend wants a KID so HE WINS the millionaire Lottery .
Money for LIFE .
She currently has limited access to her current two kids because of her Mental illness .
The last husband Cleaned out for millions along with a series of bad managers .
She is so sick she does not know the latest boyfriend another shark circling for another payday .
Sad oldest scam in the book .
“Spears works 7 days a week, 10 hours a day”
This is very hard to believe.
You're not taking into account one very big difference here than most though, that is the money involved. Her father is getting rich off her, all her money he controls and he gets paid huge bucks over this charade. He's the driving force behind the involvement, and he is benefiting hugely from it, and is the reason why I think he needs to be removed from his role immediately and given to a neutral third party.
Is Brittany mentally unstable? I believe at one time yes, but I also believe that her circumstances and surroundings with the money and fame were environmental, and not naturally occurring. Do you think she would have been like she is if she never got picked up by a talent agent? I don't, her circumstances have changed now, her father should be removed immediately and she should be allowed to pursue legal proceedings against him.
“mere allegation of “mental illness.”
Getting a psychiatrist to make this diagnosis is not an allegation. Getting one to change it is also not an allegation.
Her work schedule was given to the court.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.