Photo: Getty Images
Is someone is lying?
By Alice Kelly — Written on Jul 02, 2021
With Britney Spears’s conservators turning on each other, one issue seems to be cropping up over and over — her right to marry and have a baby.
When Britney addressed a court on June 23, she claimed the team behind her conservatorship had prevented her from removing her IUD or marrying.
"I was told right now in the conservatorship, I’m not able to get married or have a baby,” Britney said.
However, with Britney’s co-conservators — her care manager Jodi Montgomery and her father Jamie Spears — tossing blame back and forth in court documents and press releases, it remains unclear where Britney got this information.
Why does Britney Spears think she isn't allowed to get married or have a baby under her conservatorship?
We can't say for sure, but theories abound, including speculation that someone is lying to her, there has been a serious breakdown in communication or she truly lacks the mental capacity to understand the terms of her conservatorship.
Some believe Britney's father, Jamie Spears, may have lied to her.
Britney’s controversial father has appeared to be the villain involved with her conservatorship for quite some time now.
The singer unsuccessfully tried to have him removed him as a conservator, and in her testimony, she criticized his controlling attitude and behavior towards her.
Jamie Spears held the role of co-conservator from 2008 to 2019. During those years, the singer was involved in multiple relationships, including an engagement to her then-manager Jason Trawick, who was also a co-conservator from 2012 until their breakup in 2013.
It seems entirely plausible that once Trawick was removed, Jamie may have told his daughter that marriage and children would not be allowed under the conservatorship.
Jamie has fiercely denied such claims in a court filing, reminding the court that he had given Britneyand Trawick's engagement his blessing.
Jamie Spears blames co-conservator Jodi Montgomery.
In those same filings, Jamie deflected the blame onto current co-conservator, Jodi Montgomery.
“Ms. Montgomery has been fully in charge of Ms. Spears’ day-to-day personal care and medical treatment, and Ms. Montgomery has made all decisions related to those matters,” the documents read.
Montgomery, who previously acted as Britney's case manager and was named as a conservator when Jamie temporarily withdrew from the role in 2019, does seem like a logical next option to consider when trying to understand who may have convinced the singer that she is unable to marry.
Montgomery, whose role primarily involves Britney’s medical care, denied Jamie’s claims via a statement from her lawyer on her website.
"As to Britney’s right to marry, that is unaffected by the conservatorship under Probate Code §1900," the statement reads.
"As to family planning, that is also unaffected by the conservatorship. If Britney needs any assistance with either, Ms. Montgomery has and will be there to provide any assistance needed to Britney. Britney’s choice to marry and to start a family have never been impacted by the conservatorship while Ms. Montgomery has been conservator of the person."
Montgomery also appeared to cast some of the blame back on to Jamie, as she claims he has blocked some expenditures she's requested on Britney’s behalf.
"Because Ms. Montgomery does not have any power or authority over the conservatorship of the estate," the statement continues, "every expenditure made by Ms. Montgomery for Britney has had to be first approved by Jamie Spears as the conservator of the estate... Ms. Montgomery has advocated on Britney’s behalf for any expenditures that Britney has requested as well as for expenditures recommended by Britney’s medical team. Not every requested expenditure has been approved."
Court transcripts hint that court-appointed lawyer, Samuel Ingham III, may have kept Britney in the dark.
If there’s anyone who should be informing Britney of her rights within the conservatorship it’s Samuel Ingham III, the singer’s lawyer.
Doubts have already been cast over Ingham’s ability to support and represent Britney after her testimony revealed that she had not been informed of her ability to petition the court to end her conservatorship.
It doesn’t seem out of the realm of possibility, therefore, that Ingham may have failed to disclose or fully explain to Britney her right to marry and have children.
According to transcripts of a 2014 court proceeding obtained by the New York Times, Ingham at one point told Judge Reva G. Goetz that Britney believed the conservatorship prevented her from retiring, marrying and/or having children.
“I don’t recall that we made any orders about the right to marry, but you may not want to tell her that,” the judge said to Ingham at the time, to which he replied, “Somehow that did not come up in the conversation.”
If Ingham never brought up the topic to Spears again and knowingly failed to clarify the terms of her conservatorship, he may be seen as having denied her access to crucial information about her basic human rights.
Then there is the possibility that Britney is unable to retain an understanding of the terms of her conservatorship.
Conservatorships are typically reserved only for cases where someone "has physical, mental, or developmental disabilities that prevent the person from managing their own financial affairs;"
In legal terms, mental capacity involves possessing the "ability to comprehend both the nature and consequences of one's acts."
If Britney was found to lack necessary mental capacity to manage her own affairs, there is the possibility that she is truly unable to understand the terms of her conservatorship.
Is Britney right that her conservatorship forbids her from marrying or having a baby?
Under California law, specifically the probate code mentioned by Montgomery, a conservatorship does not restrict a person’s right to marry or have children.
The only exception would be if a court order is made because the person under the conservatorship is found to lack "the capacity to enter into a valid marriage."
No such order is known to have been issued for Britney.
If Britney’s lawyers or conservators are deliberately keeping this information from her or lying to her, it raises serious questions about their ethics.
However, it is also possible that Britney was made aware of her rights but may have become confused about them or forgotten.
Some have theorized that Britney has dementia and, therefore does need the conservatorship.
Conservatorships are full of confusing obstacles for anyone, so perhaps Britney simply got lost along the way in trying to understand her rights within the arrangement.
Alice Kelly is a writer living in Brooklyn, New York. Catch her covering all things social justice, news, and entertainment. Keep up with her Twitter for more.