Last month, Jamie Spears lost total control of Britney’s fortune.
The news was widely celebrated by #FreeBritney supporters.
In the aftermath of that and the Framing Britney Spears documentary, Jamie seems to be scrambling to save face.
His lawyer is now insisting to the world that Jamie is only doing what he thinks is best.
Vivian Thoreen is an attorney who represents Jamie Spears.
As such, it is her literal job to defend her client, even from the indefensible.
It is therefore no surprise to see her cheering on his role as Britney’s conservator.
Vivian spoke to CNN, claiming that “every single decision” that Jamie makes is in Britney’s best interests.
“[Jamie] would love nothing more than to see Britney not need a conservatorship,” she then alleged.
That is … quite the claim to make, all things considered.
“Whether or not there is an end to the conservatorship really depends on Britney,” Vivian insisted.
“If she wants to end her conservatorship,” she announced, “she can file a petition to end it.”
That struck many fans as a dishonest look at the situation, but we’ll get into that in a moment.
“Jamie is not suggesting that he is the perfect dad,” Vivian acknowledged.
In a massive understatement, she continued: “or that he would receive any ‘Father of the Year’ award.”
If he received an invite for anything of the sort, it would certainly be a trap set by #FreeBritney supporters.
“Like any parent,” Vivian said, “he doesn’t always see eye-to-eye on what Britney may want.”
“But,” she claimed, “Jamie believes every single decision he has made has been in her best interest.”
Even if that were true, Jamie’s sincerety of beliefs don’t necessarily justify his actions.
Look, if a heart surgeon believes that they’re doing a good job but they lacerate the aorta, they screwed up.
When you’re dealing with someone’s entire life, that’s an important job, more important than “trying your best.”
In that situation, if your best isn’t good enough, you have to hand over the job to someone who can do it right.
But we mentioned that fans characterized Vivian’s claims about the conservatorship being “up to Britney” as dishonest.
It’s not that she was necessarily lying, of course.
It’s just that the complicated topic is not quite as simple as Vivian made it sound.
First of all, conservatorships are notoriously difficult — or even impossible — to abolish.
They were designed for people with lifelong disabilities and especially for those experiencing severe cognitive difficulties in old age.
If you set up a guardianship for a 93-year-old, the court doesn’t expect them to magically get better when they’re 98.
So unfortunately, even with millions of supporters and Britney’s own mother backing her, dissolving the conservatorship seems unlikely.
Many disability writes advocates have pointed to Britney’s plight, noting that they are not alone.
Advocates have added that if this can be done to a world-famous millionaire in the spotlight, imagine how much worse it is for anonymous victims of these laws.
Secondly, fans note that Britney accepted her conservatorship, or at least resigned herself to the fact that it was going to happen, back in 2008.
What she did not accept was that her father would be in control of it.
Britney’s one repeated plea was that Jamie not be in charge of her conservatorship.
That plea, like her human rights, was sadly ignored.
Jamie is widely reviled, and was already almost universally disliked before he allegedly attacked one of his grandsons.
It’s clear that he wants to somehow clear up his image or cast doubt upon the #FreeBritney narrative. It’s also clear that it’s not working.