JUDY WOODRUFF: Britney Spears' public battle to regain control of her finances and personal
life has brought a new focus on conservatorships, legal agreements that, in her case, put her
father in charge of her financial affairs and daily decision-making.
Yamiche Alcindor explores the latest on this case and the broader issues it's raising about
conservatorships and guardianships across the country.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Judy, for the last 13 years, Britney Spears has been living under a conservatorship.
She's continued to perform, to put out albums and to earn millions of dollars, but she has
not controlled her finances, personal decisions or almost anything about her life.
Three weeks ago, she complained publicly for the first time about how this has impacted
her life. She told the judges she has been forced to entertain. She said she's being
forced to also use a form of birth control, even though she wants to have more children.
During her hearing this afternoon, that same Los Angeles judge said Spears can now hire
her own attorney to represent her, something that was denied to her until now.
To look at all of this, I'm joined by Ronan Farrow. He's an investigative reporter and
contributing writer to "The New Yorker, " and Jonathan Martinis senior director for law
and policy at the Center For Disability Rights at Syracuse University.
Thank you both for being here.
Ronan, I want to start with you.
There was this development now. Britney Spears can hire her own attorney. What more do we
know about that development? And as you have done extensive reporting, on this case, what
stands out to you about this case?
RONAN FARROW, "The New Yorker": Yamiche, well, obviously what we're learning today is this
lawyer of Spears' own choosing, Mathew Rosengart, a former federal prosecutor and a prominent
L.A.-based attorney, is going to be able to represent her.
And why that's significant is because, as we have laid out in this recent investigative
report in "The New Yorker, " Britney Spears has been trying to secure her own counsel
of her own choosing for years. We document how again and again, essentially from the
inception to have the conservatorship, she was setting clandestine meetings with contacts
who might give her phones that she could then use to call lawyers, up to and including sophisticated
plans where she would meet a contact in a hotel steam room to get a Ziploc bag with
a cell phone in it.
So, couple of things from that. One, hiring her own counsel is a significant step and
a long time coming. Two, those kinds of plans, that level of sophistication reminds us this
is a very high-functioning individual. That's apparent because of a number of things. You
mentioned the amount of money she's made, the amount of performing she's done.
But that's pivotal in a fight she's locked into legally where her father and others who
defend the conservatorship still argue she has a level of incapacity that justifies this
extraordinary level of control that is now coming under scrutiny.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: And, Ronan, I want to stick with you for a minute.
She's 39 years old. This has been going on for 13 years. Talk a bit about just how little
control she had over these years. Her father has been a big influence here in this arrangement.
RONAN FARROW: We lay out the motivations of this conservatorship in our recent story,
which I think are complicated to unpack.
I think there is an element of sincere concern about Britney Spears' well-being. The conservatorship
was put into place at a time when she appeared to be under distress, appeared to be behaving
erratically, where she was, by her own admission, letting people into her life that might not
be a positive influence.
That said, what you also see when you go inside of those rooms where this plot to place her
in this extremely restrictive legal structure was hatch is that there was an element of
this that was motivated by a family that was locked in a power struggle and that had been
financially dependent on her for a long time.
And that is in some ways distinctive to Britney Spears' level of fame and of wealth, but in
other respects is symptomatic of the wider ways in which this particular kind of legal
structure, particularly this variety of conservatorship, which is quite extreme, can be vulnerable
to abuse.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Jonathan, I want to come to you.
Ronan just talked about this being an extreme case. She testified, though, last month that
she also didn't know that she could get out of this, didn't know that she could petition
to get out of this conservatorship.
Now that she can hire her own attorney, what impact might that have on her ability to get
out of this? And talk a little bit about how indicative this case is of how conservatorships
operate overall.
JONATHAN MARTINIS, Syracuse University: I mean, first of all, it's great news for Britney
Spears that she can finally hire her own attorney and we can celebrate that.
But we need to think about what it is we're celebrating today. What we're celebrating
is that, after 13 years, she is finally able to hire her own attorney. Think about it this
way.
If, 13 years ago, Britney Spears had committed murder with an axe, if she was an axe murderer
13 years ago, she would have had the right to choose her own attorney then. So what we're
doing today is we are celebrating that, after 13 years, Britney Spears finally has the same
rights as an axe murderer.
And what we need to think about is this. There are hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities
today who do not have the same rights as axe murderers. So if we want to look at this from
a larger sense, I think what we should be doing today is saying two things. One, why?
Why do people with disabilities not have the same rights to do what anyone else could do?
And, two, can't we do better? The impact that having her own attorney can have on her own
case is extreme. She can finally speak with somebody that she is confident that she's
chosen, that she knows, someone she can trust and get to know her, so that she can, as Ronan
said, demonstrate to the court that which none of us should have to demonstrate, that
we are capable of exercising our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
If this is someone who can arrange a meeting in a steam room to get a cell phone, this
is probably someone who can work with other people to help her make decisions.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Such important points there, especially the point about the right that
you have an axe murderer vs. someone under a conservatorship.
I want to, though, ask you, with that said, these conservatorships and these guardianships,
they can be beneficial to some if handled correctly. Talk a little bit about that.
JONATHAN MARTINIS: Absolutely. I never say bad things about guardianship in general.
My sister is the guardian of my godson, and thank God for it.
So, when guardianships work the way they should, they empower people, they help people. In
fact, the law in California and elsewhere says that guardians should work with people
to build their abilities, to help them learn how to make decisions if they truly can't,
so that they can emerge from guardianship, if possible.
And if guardianship worked that way, you would have no bigger fan than me, because what better
way to help someone than if they truly cannot make decisions, empower them to do so, and,
when they have got it, when they have reached a level they can make decisions, if they're
able to do that, when they're able to do what Britney Spears appears to have demonstrated
she can do, to go back to the court and say, good news, Judge, I did my job, fire me.
I have seen it happen. I have seen happiness in courtrooms. I have seen judges celebrating
people regaining their rights. And it's something that needs to happen more. We can do better.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Ronan, I want to come back to you.
You brought to light of new details of how it came to be that Britney Spears made that
decision to speak out in court. Talk about that. And don't leave out the part that she
called 911 on the eve of this hearing. Tell us about it.
RONAN FARROW: Well, we document a long history of Britney Spears being distressed about this
arrangement dating back to when she was first placed in the second of two involuntary hospitalizations
that ultimately provided the grist for her family to place her into this arrangement.
Even while she was still in the hospital and was being placed into this legal structure,
she was, it appears, complaining in various ways about it, trying to find her own counsel,
expressing distress about it. And we document some pretty alarming alleged remarks about
the motivations behind this by her father and others, and some pretty alarming ways
in which she was apparently treated, where someone who, by many accounts, was in an abusive,
controlling relationship with her in a lot of ways was allowed to take control of her
life.
This obviously culminated in not just her remarks in court, but, as you pointed out,
the day before those remarks several weeks ago, her going into a local police station
near where she lives, and actually calling the 911 dispatch center from a phone there
in the lobby when someone couldn't see her immediately. And an officer did later get
dispatched to her home.
No formal police complaint was filed out of that, but she clearly was complaining about
conservatorship abuse. And that's relevant in light of today's news, Yamiche, because
she again in court today used that phrase and talked about how she would like to see
her father charged with conservatorship abuse.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Jonathan, she's also continued -- I think the thing that underscores all
of this is and what makes us so extraordinary is that she's continued to work. She's continued
to earn millions of dollars.
She's an unusual case. How does that connect? Her ability to continue to function and make
money, how does that connect to the way that people that are disabled at times come under
these arrangements and the impact that they have on their autonomy?
JONATHAN MARTINIS: I mean, with all due respect, it's not an unusual case.
There was an article in today's Washington Post by a writer named Theresa Vargas that
covers a client, a person I worked with, who had her own apartment, had her own job, had
her own life, and then went into guardianship and lost it all.
She wanted to go back to her job and was told, no, you work in a sheltered workshop, where
you make less than minimum wage. Now get used to your new life. She wanted to see your friends
and was told, get used to your new life. Make new friends.
So there are people with disabilities right now who are perfectly able to work, who are
perfectly able to function and be meaningful, productive members of society, if given the
supports and services that we all need to do so. And that's the key part here.
There is not a person watching this show today who doesn't need help to do something. The
differences, if you don't have disabilities, if you're a temporarily able-bodied person,
because we're all one second away from having disabilities, if you are a temporarily able-bodied
person, and you ask for help, or you get support, you're doing a smart thing.
If you say, I don't understand, please explain it to me, you're being wise and making an
informed choice. Unfortunately, if you're a person with disabilities, historically speaking
and today, if you show any -- quote, unquote -- "limitation, " any -- quote, unquote -- "need,
" there is a very high probability that someone is going to say that means you can't do things.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Yes.
JONATHAN MARTINIS: And, as we have seen in Britney Spears' case, and as we see across
the country, that too often results in you losing the right to do everything.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Well, this is an extraordinary case. We're going to, of course, keep following
it.
Thank you so much, Ronan Farrow and Jonathan Martinis, for joining us. We really appreciate
it.
RONAN FARROW: Thanks, Yamiche.