Kanye West says MTV exploited her to get ratings for its awards show; MTV did get a big ratings boost this year, credited to Britney’s appearance.  But perhaps Miki Taylor, entertainment writer for MSNBC, says it best:  “Girlfriend has some serious issues.” 

What, if anything, can be done to help Britney?

Sad but true, Britney Spears has the legal right to make bad, horrible, shockingly stupid career decisions.  If she had refused to perform, she might have faced a breach of contract action by MTV; by going on, and being horrible, she did technically perform her act.  They can’t sue her.  And, why would they?  MTV gotta be loving this attention – ratings are up, people are talking MTV.

However, Britney Spears may have some personal issues that need to be explored.  Looks like we can all agree on this one.  What can be done? 

1.  If someone is not competent to act for themselves, then a court can decide to appoint someone else to act on their behalf, as the guardian of their person (making decisions like health care, living arrangements, etc.) as well as guardian of their estate (making the money calls).  Guardianships are formal, courtroom proceedings with admissible evidence shown to a judge, who orders the guardianship and then monitors how the guardian is doing.   An example, someone is in a car wreck and remains in a coma: a court can appoint a guardian to handle things for him while he’s incapacitated. 

2.   If someone is a danger to themselves or others, then they may be physically taken to a mental health facility and held there (usually 72 hours) while their mental health is being assessed.   Someone threatening suicide, for example, can be taken by the police against their will to a hospital and confined there – it’s for their own safety, as well as others.

3.  Absent these levels of inability to function, what to do?  Loved ones can intervene – the power of interventions cannot be underestimated.  Lots of people entering rehab and mental facilities on a voluntary basis do so because of the collective push from an intervention.   Loved ones can also voice concern, and talk straight and tough: think Dr. Phil.  What would Dr. Phil say to BritBrit?  Now, there’s a show….

4.  Being an unfit mother is not the same evidentiary hurdle as incompetency.  The best interest of the children in the Spears-Federline custody dispute is the deciding factor there.  The judge will look at the children, and decide what is best for them to be safe and nurtured.   It’s a strong fact to be argued that Kevin Federline was hosting a Cars-themed birthday party for the boys on the same weekend that Britney was partying with Diddy and screwing up on the MTV stage. 

Bottom line, Federline’s custody case gets better by the day.  Media reports of Britney don’t reveal someone so seriously off-kilter that the law will allow someone else to substitute their decisions for hers.  Britney has a legal right to destroy her career, to drink too much, to choose Diddy’s party over her children’s.   Sad, sad, sad, but true.�

Britney Spears’ cousin/assistant Alli Simms

K-Fed’s attorneys are working hard:  the custody fight was just filed August 8th, and already the discovery process has begun – looks like Alli’s going to have to give deposition testimony about her personal knowledge of Britney’s parenting skills (or lack thereof), as is Britney’s producer, JR Rotem.  

What’s all this?  And, what’s all this about these lollipops that Britney is seen with all the time?  Is there a connection in the filing of the suit and the lollipop rumors?

Days before K-Fed’s filing of his new custody fight – where he’s seeking primary custody of the boys Sean Preston and Jayden James – stories began appearing about those lollipops that Britney Spears is always sucking on.  First, it was a comment in a blog or two, then it hit the bigger tabloids, breaking with the National Enquirer. 

The candy is purported laced with drugs: morphine, some say.  Others, fentanyl cytrate - a very powerful painkiller that is 90 times more potent than morphine.   

These things are made for cancer patients, and they are potentially lethal. 

Lynne Spears claims to have only recently learned that drug candy existed, no word on when Kevin Federline discovered their existence.  Reports say that Britney’s been using the drug pops since 2004: would her husband have known about them, even if her mother didn’t? 

If K-Fed knew, doesn’t make him sound like the best parent in town, either.  Maybe he knew, maybe he didn’t. 

Best argument for Brit-Brit, assuming the rumors are true, is to say K-Fed did know, he always knew, and didn’t care. 

Best argument for K-Fed, he just found out, and now he’s going for custody.   Assuming that the candy story is accurate, K-Fed didn’t have a choice: he had to file, and he has to fight. 

Alli’s going to have one heckuva deposition. That’s her with Britney, and they’ve both got lollipops, in the photo.�

These are just the events reported in the past three days.  

All these antics beg the question: does Britney Spears want to lose her kids?  Because if that’s the goal, she’s doing a fine job of it.   Why?

First, Britney Spears is getting a lot of warning.  Kevin Federline’s camp has been leaking tidbits about his attorneys working toward Kevin gaining full custody of the two boys for awhile now.  And, Britney’s mother has also been rumored to be investigating her grandparent rights, as well as becoming aligned with Kevin regarding the children.   

Witnesses are reporting Britney Spears distracting her children with bottles filled with soda and feeding them Doritos; asking a dentist to whiten one child’s teeth; and there’s the history of almost dropping the toddler, failing to use car seats, and all the other strange, wierd behavior that TMZ.COM has documented so well (a lawyer’s dream — all that documentation).

Over at the Huffington Post, Tyler Pontier is begging for it.  “Someone please take her children away from her,” Pontier pleads in his August post. 

Kevin Federline, as the children’s father, can bring suit under California law to gain full custody of the two boys — and Britney’s illegal trip to Vegas with the kids last month gave K-Fed lots of ammo here.  (She violated a court order.) 

Plus, the California Department of Social Services’ Child Protective Services has already has a file on Britney Spears (remember when she drove with a baby on her lap?).   It’s not unreasonable to think that CPS may not swoop down and reopen its investigations, since California law defines child abuse as any of the following:

• A child is physically injured by other than accidental means.
• A child is subjected to willful cruelty or unjustifiable punishment.
• A child is abused or exploited sexually.
• A child is neglected by a parent or caretaker who fails to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care or supervision.

Oh, and what about Lynne Spears?  Does Grandma have rights?  Yep.  California Code Section 3104 provides for a grandparent’s rights to visit with their grandchild if there is an established relationship or bond between them.  Lynne Spears has been around her grandsons since birth; she meets the criteria.  She could file suit at anytime, too. 

The way that Britney Spears is behaving, looks like she’s just asking someone to come and take these kids from her.   She is certainly the best witness for the other side in the inevitable court fight.   

�

TMZ.COM

Britney’s got another legal fight on her hands here.  

What if you’re like Britney, and don’t want your mom around your kids?

Each state is different in dealing with the rights of grandparents.  You need to check the law that applies to your situation.  As you do, remember that all states look from a view of the “best interests of the child,” and you’ll need some serious facts to support cutting little ones off from grandparent contact.  Most courts view grandparents as a good thing for kids, even if the parents have issues.�