Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OK, what's a 'conservatorship'?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    OK, what's a 'conservatorship'?

    I've seen the word, but I don't know what it means, and it's better to search here than on Wikipedia...

    #2
    It's abuse. We're watching the Britney Spears case and hoping she regains control of her life.

    Comment


      #3
      In the US, a conservatorship is a binding legal relationship that takes two forms:
      • Control over an "estate" which is to say, all financial aspects of somebody's life
      • Control over a "person" which is to say, essentially control of everything else
      Generally they are granted by the state, either based on a psychological profiling that's reviewed by a state board or through a judge.

      There is, as VT indicates, a great potential for abuse there, as you are effectively not allowing a person to make decisions about their life anymore, although I believe that Spears is only under a financial conservatorship, so it's more about control over her own financial decisions.

      I actually held a conservatorship over my father (along with my sister) for around 8 years as he suffered from early-onset dementia. Getting the financial conservatorship was extremely difficult and took many years of going back and forth with state agencies and eventually involving a court date (as a small piece of evidence as to whether my father was capable of taking care of his own affairs, he spent the entirely of the time in court talking to me and my sister's lawyer as if she were his lawyer (he did not have a lawyer) and when the judge gently said that considering his father, both brothers, and both of his children had all shown up to support a conservatorship over his estate being put in place, said "Yeah, that's probably a good idea"). We never were able to get a conservatorship over his person until he had an accident that meant that he spent the rest of his life in various medical facilities.

      Comment


        #4
        I guess this is what's known as power of attorney/ enduring power of attorney in the UK

        ( and thanks for sharing your experience scratchmonkey, that must have been very upsetting)

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by scratchmonkey View Post
          There is, as VT indicates, a great potential for abuse there, as you are effectively not allowing a person to make decisions about their life anymore, although I believe that Spears is only under a financial conservatorship, so it's more about control over her own financial decisions.
          She's just stated in court that she had an IUD fitted against her will and is unable to arrange an appointment with a doctor to have it removed without the approval of her conservator.That's not a financial decision.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Vicarious Thrillseeker View Post

            She's just stated in court that she had an IUD fitted against her will and is unable to arrange an appointment with a doctor to have it removed without the approval of her conservator.That's not a financial decision.
            Ah christ, I hadn't seen that and looking it up, she is under a conservatorship of both body and person. That's completely insane and immoral; not that I'm too surprised given what we let people with money get away with legally in this country.

            Nefertiti2 It is broadly similar as power of attorney, which as UA points out below, you can sign over to somebody. A good comparison between my parents is that when my father, when advised by his GP to give me and my sister power of attorney, scoffed and indicated he would never do it, whereas our mother, who is in perfectly good shape mentally, mailed us both a form giving us power of attorney "just in case" a couple years back.
            Last edited by scratchmonkey; 23-06-2021, 23:16.

            Comment


              #7
              As the point that VT notes makes clear, at least in the US, the conservator has considerably more control over the person's life than someone who only held a power of attorney (which any competent individual can grant anyone else, without any court becoming involved).

              Comment


                #8
                Just for clarity, scratchmomkey - I'm only commenting on the Spears case - which is horrific. I'm not making any comment on your family situation, which must have been a very difficult time for you.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Vicarious Thrillseeker View Post
                  Just for clarity, scratchmomkey - I'm only commenting on the Spears case - which is horrific. I'm not making any comment on your family situation, which must have been a very difficult time for you.
                  No worries VT, the main similarity between them is that both Spears and my father resisted the conservatorship, and I do find it telling that we had to scrap for literal years to get conservatorship of his estate (which consisted entirely of his monthly SSI payments and a negligible pension, all of which plus more went to his care) and didn't receive conservatorship over his person until it was entirely a moot point, and this is children seeking such for their parent, which is the "typical" situation, whereas Spears' father appears to have been able to get both over his child relatively breezily.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Yeah, it is important to note that the Spears situation is not at all how this is supposed to work.

                    The judge there appears to have delegated absolutely all authority over her life to her father - who had already been living extremely well off of the fruits of his daughter's labour for over a decade.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Something to note here, which speaks to the good points of both the NHS and my husband, is that at all points throughout my complete and utter psychotic breakdown, all medical professionals and my husband sought at every single stage of the way to get my consent for whatever was about to happen next, and there was never any suggestion of my rights to decide on or refuse treatment being taken away. The same cannot be said for my other family members.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Spears possibly had a similar, though not identical, breakdown to me. The thought that in different circumstances, I might not be in control of my body, life, finances or access to my children, years later, is heartbreaking.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View Post
                          I guess this is what's known as power of attorney/ enduring power of attorney in the UK

                          ( and thanks for sharing your experience scratchmonkey, that must have been very upsetting)
                          Ahem. Lasting Power of Attorney. You can't make Enduring Powers of Attorney anymore, although any which were signed off prior to 01 October 2007 are still valid.

                          There is a big difference between what appears to have happened under the conservator process and LPAs. In England and Wales, there are two LPA documents, one for your Property and Finances and one for your Health and Welfare. They are completely discrete documents and you can appoint completely different attorneys for each document if you wish. LPAS can't be used until they have been registered with the Office of The Public Guardian, either by the donor (person making it) or by the attorneys. When we prepare them, we always advise our clients to register them immediately as the process takes around three months to complete, and if there are any errors in the document (it happens) they can be corrected when all parties still have it fresh in their minds, and crucially, the donor still has the capacity to understand what's going on.

                          Enduring Powers of Attorney only cover property and finances, and are only registered by the attorney when the donor lacks capacity, or the attorney suspects the donor is losing capacity. As part of the registration process, a notice must be served on the donor so they always have the chance to object to the registration. Once registered, the attorney gains complete control over the donor's finances until such time as the donor regains capacity, if ever.

                          Once a LPA is registered, its use depends on the specific decision being made, as opposed to the blanket takeover of the EPA. Each time a decision has to be made, the attorneys need to weigh up the donor's ability to make it themselves. If they can, they must. If they can't, then as far as possible their views should be sought, and the attorneys should make the decision in the same way the donor would - a committed pacifist would not buy BAE Systems shares, so attorneys can't on their behalf. Capacity to make decisions is also specific to the question. Sell your house? High degree of capacity required to understand the process and consequences. What colour trousers to wear today? Rather a lower bar to get over.

                          LPAs for Health and Welfare can only be used if the donor lacks capacity for the decision on question, and the donor specifically has to decide whether or not to give the attorneys the right to make life sustaining treatments on their behalf.

                          LPAs for property and finances can be used as an execution document to carry out a donor's wishes if they have capacity but are physically incapable of executing it.

                          Finally, if you don't have an LPA or EPA to cover the decision, then someone has to apply to the Court of Protection to be appointed as a Deputy, which is costly, time consuming, produces a very limited set of authorities and is expensive, even if you don't get solicitors involved. And you have to send annual accounts to the Court for approval, and pay for the privilege of doing do.

                          In conclusion, do your LPAs, they are insurance policies.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Balderdasha View Post
                            Spears possibly had a similar, though not identical, breakdown to me. The thought that in different circumstances, I might not be in control of my body, life, finances or access to my children, years later, is heartbreaking.
                            My two girls saw Britney Spears live in concert in Blackpool (yes, Blackpool), snd since then both have taken a keen interest in her wellbeing. I picked up information on her conservatorship from both of them and I'm appalled. I honestly think what has happened - and is still happening - to her is absolutely barbaric. To have your reproductive rights taken from you - she is only 39 - to have been forced to take cocktails of behaviour-altering medication against your will; to continue to make you undertake vast tours (and have you choreograph the whole show, which demonstrates a sophisticated level of competence) while at the same time allege that you're unable to make the most rudimentary decisions for yourself - is criminal, in my opinion. I hope she gets release and is able to get on with the rest of her life. And I hope her family members who continue to milk and abuse her, go to prison.



                            Singer directly addresses the court: ‘This conservatorship is doing me way more harm than good’

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Thanks for all your considered responses to my question, really informative - OTF, best place on the internet...

                              Comment


                                #16
                                I find it astonishing that a conservatorship for someone who was at the time in their 20's was issued seemingly in perpetuity. Surely, this should have been reviewed on a regular basis.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  It has been reviewed, though not as regularly or thoroughly as it should have been

                                  The court has been actively complicit in facilitating this outrage since the beginning

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Presumably, an issue here is that a 3rd party can't lobby for the lifting of the Conservatorship as they don't have standing under Californian law, so getting a court to rule that someone is actually competent enough to not need a consrvatorship needs someone the court currently finds incompetent to persuade them that they are, when the ability of that person to actually fie a suit is affected by their inability to have the autonomy to file a suit.

                                    When you say 'The Court' here, UA, what is that in this case? Who - apart from the Californian legislators - has fucked up here?

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Yes, though the theory is that the court is supposed to act in the interests of all parties, and it is has the right to seek input from third parties (and has done so in some cases I am aware of).

                                      Scratchmonkey will know the details of California law better, but the conservatorship was initially appointed by a judge of the California Probate Court, and he/that court was responsible for its periodic review. This kind of conservatorship is also supposed to require that a lawyer be appointed to represent the interests of the individual for exactly the reasons you mention, but that process also seems to have failed here.*

                                      The current proceeding is before the California Superior Court, which is the general court of first instance.

                                      * I can be extremely cynical about such things, but my supposition is that the amount of money available here is so great that it has both induced and allowed a host of involved parties to put their own pecuniary interests first.
                                      Last edited by ursus arctos; 24-06-2021, 19:58.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        It's been a while, as I remember, the initial review (conservatorship of estate only) in my father's case was done by a social worker appointed by the court that talked to myself and my sister over the phone, and I believe talked to my father in person, although that might have been a phone conversation as well. The process was really more of a "let's make sure this is still working for everybody" than anything else, and the social worker was very easy to work with, it didn't feel like a real grilling at all -- this may be because my father was rather obviously extremely impaired by this point. After my father was first in a critical care facility after his accident and then in a specialized memory care facility, I believe that he had a lawyer appointed to him by the county; however, it was very much the lawyer calling the facility and them verifying that yes, he needed to be there.

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          It's even worse than I thought.

                                          Click through to read the whole thread (spoiler: this court appointed counsel has been paid USD 10,000 a WEEK for 13 YEARS and "no one can remember" the basis for his appointment)

                                          https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1407820220031541248
                                          Last edited by ursus arctos; 25-06-2021, 12:45.

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            https://twitter.com/ewagmeister/status/1410415161312043013

                                            Comment


                                              #23
                                              The next step: some kind of appeal?

                                              Comment


                                                #24
                                                The next step is for her to formally request termination, which she hasn't done yet.

                                                She may need new counsel to do that, however.

                                                Comment


                                                  #25
                                                  I don’t know how she hasn’t just fled the state or the country at this point. She could do performances on YouTube at $10 a pop and live comfortably for the rest of her life. Go to Iceland or something.

                                                  Comment

                                                  Working...
                                                  X