What’s Next for Britney Spears

Good Morning.

For months since the New York Times documentary “Framing Britney Spears” exploded, debates have raged around her story.

It raises questions about a legal system that would allow a once estranged family member to take on the career of one of the world’s most famous artists. It has led millennial women like me to look for the pop culture narratives of our childhood.

But one question has arisen the most: what does Britney Spears think of all of this?

Last week the singer answered that question for a judge – and everyone else – in a tearing 23-minute statement saying she was drugged against her will and prevented from marrying or having her IUD removed.

“I just want my life back and it’s been 13 years and it’s been enough,” she told a judge in Los Angeles. “I haven’t had my money in a long time, and it is my wish and my dream that all of this will come to an end.”

My colleagues Samantha Stark and Joe Coscarelli reported on the saga. I’ve talked to them about what’s next. Here is our conversation, edited and condensed:

First of all, can you briefly explain to us what happened in court last week?

Samantha: At the last hearing Britney had, she had her court-appointed attorney, Samuel Ingham, say she wanted to go to the court. The anticipation for what she would say was so great and she let it all out.

We had received these sealed documents so we knew how she felt about being taken to a mental health facility and taking revenge on her. She tried to communicate that last week. She said to the judge: You didn’t listen to me. The last time I spoke, I felt like I wasn’t being heard at all. I felt dead

You bridged many court records, also for your report describing how Britney had urged the Conservatories to end in 2014. Even so, her report was pretty terrible. Was there anything that surprised you in particular?

Samantha: She really resisted this narrative her father had put forward that she was not forced into the mental health facility. What surprised me was that no one moved to investigate the allegations.

Britney told the judge she didn’t know she could petition the court to quit the conservatory. That was shocking to us. They said she could ask to end it at any time.

Joe: From a procedural point of view, an interesting quirk of the conservatory system is that as a conservatory you don’t often have to go to court or communicate with the judge.

When they meet, which they usually do every few months, Britney doesn’t have to come to these things, and in fact, she usually doesn’t.

The special thing about it was bringing her voice to the record. Because of Covid, the California court system still does a lot of things remotely so everyone can listen. That would not normally have been the case.

When the hearing started, a lawyer moved one of Britney’s current restorers to seal the speech and Britney cut it off and said I want people to hear it. So until shortly before it was open whether their statements would be made public.

Can you describe how it felt for you to hear Britney extensively about her Conservatory speech after filming “Framing Britney Spears” without her participation?

Samantha: It’s been a year we did this and hope we get things right and do the right thing by even making a documentary about them. There’s always this nagging question of whether she wants that.

Hearing her really say it all out loud and she said, no, I want people to hear this – for me, emotionally, this was the biggest thing that has ever happened. I think our coverage strengthened their story. But that had already built up in her before we started reporting.

Joe: We have spent so many years following breadcrumbs about how they reacted under this conservatory. You see a tiny piece in public. More in court records. Just letting her set it all out – it was harrowing and mind-boggling.

As someone who covers the world of celebrities, the more sensitive the story, the less I expect to hear from the main characters themselves. Famous people basically stop talking to the media because they have social media. I never expected to hear her talk about it.

What’s next? In theory, could the judge come back and say, “OK, we hear you: Conservatory over?” Then what?

Joe: For the last year at least, I think you’ve seen Britney, through her court appointed attorney, take small steps to end the Conservatory work, if not entirely, then her father’s involvement.

As far as a judge ends it right now, I don’t think it would go that way. I think we’re going to see a flurry of additional submissions, but these conservatories are so unprecedented that it is also unprecedented to reverse them.

Samantha: Britney brought up the point that she was never able to hire her own lawyer; It is unclear what procedurally would have to happen in order to get a lawyer of her choice. And that’s something that could happen. She could request the termination of the conservatory. She stressed that she is taking care of herself and working for herself and all these people she pays.

She said she would like the conservatory to end without a mental exam as her father could choose her doctors and she might be concerned about it.

Joe: Law. The fact that the Conservatory has so much control over everything from her mental health to her safety means that she is asking for someone else to step in – in this case, a judge. She’s stuck in this loop and now she’s trying to get out.

Is California’s Conservatory System Unique? And did Britney’s saga spark calls for change?

Joe: I know every state has a version of it. Sometimes they are called guardianship.

There have always been questions about oversight and whether this is the best way to approach these things. The cases you hear about the most, like Casey Kasem or Sumner Redstone, are people with a lot of money and who are unable to work towards the end of their lives.

Britney is young, active, and professional. We had a bit of this from outside the courtroom: people demanding more oversight of the system because they may have loved ones who they thought were manipulated before they died joined #FreeBritney activists who did it as their own human rights violation. We have heard some bipartisan talk about reform now that this is at the forefront of culture.

Samantha: It’s difficult because the rules vary by state and sometimes even by district. We have tried to figure out how many people are listed in the United States, and some estimates put it up to a million people, but they are not consistently followed.

What are your most pressing unanswered questions for the future?

Joe: A big question is who drove this ship. There seemed to be a lot of players out there who weren’t as proactive for Britney as they should have been, from the judges to their court-appointed attorney. Britney mentioned her management team and, without naming names, her entire family. She only singled out her father.

Much of the spotlight will be on the people around them: who was inspired to keep this thing going against their will? As we now know, she has been raising her hand since 2014 and saying one version of it. Systematic and Britney-specific questions will be asked for circles of responsible persons.

Samantha: And I think we’re just waiting to see what happens next because they didn’t come up with an action plan in court. So are they going to request the termination of the conservatories, and if so, how long will it take? How fast can it go? And will Britney continue to speak out?

For more:

We still have to know that today