In This Section
TV Guide Spotlight
Also on TVGuide.com
|
« Today's News: Our Take
Britney's Folks "Disappointed" She's Out: "We Believe Her Life Is at Risk"
Britney Spears by Mark Sullivan/ WireImage.com
Britney Spears on Wednesday high-tailed it out of the UCLA Medical Center's psych ward, quickly set up camp at the Beverly Hills Hotel and (by some accounts) hooked back up with increasingly oily paparazzo Adnan, leaving her parents to do everything they can to keep her off the Anna Nicole track and salvage her young life. "As parents of an adult child in the [throes] of a mental-health crisis, we were extremely disappointed... to learn that over the recommendation of her treating psychiatrist, our daughter Britney was released from the hospital that could best care for her and keep her safe," Jamie and Lynne Spears say in a statement to CNN's Anderson Cooper. "We are deeply concerned about our daughter's safety and vulnerability and we believe her life is presently at risk."
Though Jamie last week was granted conservatorship of Britney — effectively wresting control from bad-news manager Sam Lutfi — he says that that court order is "being blatantly disregarded. We ask only that the court's orders be enforced so that a tragedy may be averted."
Gimme More Britney coverage:
• Britney Spears Released, Lutfi Enlists Image Help
• Brit's Dad Defends Actions, Manager Accused of Drugging Spears
• Britney's Dad Granted Control, Lutfi Kicked to Curb
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 8:58 AM
|
I don't if you received that quote via text or if you're transcribing it, but I believe the word 'throws' should actually be 'throes'.
From Merriam-Webster online:
Main Entry: throe
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English thrawe, throwe, from Old English thrawu, thrēa threat, pang; akin to Old High German drawa threat
Date: 13th century
1: pang spasm <death throes> <throes of childbirth>
2plural : a hard or painful struggle <the throes of revolutionary social change — M. D. Geismar>
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 9:20 AM
|
|
Yes, apparently the original statement contained a typo, and I was copying straight from that. I've edited the item. - MWM
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 9:22 AM
|
You rock, Matt! 
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 9:46 AM
|
I guess I'm getting old when I catch myself saying things like "what's the matter with today's kids?"
What the Spears family is going through with both daughters is not unusual, unfortunately. I'm single and in my early 40's, and being that I know very few people my age who aren't married I find that my social circle is primarily in their mid 20's to mid 30's. I love them, but the things these "kids" prioritize. They all talk about what plastic surgery they are getting done, they judge people strictly by their looks and their money and therefore feel lithe pressure to be perfect. There's no interest in intellectual discussion or pursuits.....it's just all about image, image, image.
What kind of stable foundation can that be if you are that shallow or faced with that much pressure to look a certain way and have certain things. Seriously, am I the only one who thinks there's a collective problem here?
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 10:38 AM
|
ctheslayer. there is no more a collective problem than there ever was. there always have been stupid people. there always have been shallow people. i have heard plenty of people in their forties and beyond give very idiotic and/or shallow reasons for voting for whomever.
there are still plenty of decently intelligent folks in the world, however.
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 11:38 AM
|
there are still plenty of decently intelligent folks in the world, however.
The why aren't any of them running for president?
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 12:01 PM
|
They aren't running for President because, unfortunately, this country does not reward the best and the brightest with enough monetary gain to allow them to front a national campaign for the presidency.
If you actually look at those "crazy" Independents at the primaries, you will find plenty of intelligent people who could really make a difference...the only problem is they can't drum up the cash for a campaign that can compete with the two major parties.
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 12:10 PM
|
|
I'd love to know who the moron was who decided that Britney is okay to be out of the hospital. It's apparent to everyone just how disturbed the girl really is. My heart goes out to her parents who are watching their daughter self-destruct, and unfortunately they don't seem to be getting any help from a supposedly reputable hospital. If Britney ends up harming herself, or someone else, which seems very likely, the idiot who released her should be held accountable for making such an obviously stupid decision.
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 12:29 PM
|
Well, the voting was just an example, the main thing I was - and am - concerned about is this shallowness and obsession with image. How can you be a sane person if you constantly have to worry about how you compare lookswise with someone else?
One girl actually told me that she hopes that if her husband ever leaves her, it's for a more beautiful woman b/c she could always have more surgery, etc, to get him back. But she would die if he left her for a less-attractive woman b/c there would be nothing she could do.
???????????????????????????
How about chalk him up to being a lecherous louse and moving on with your life?
Seriously, if I thought that was all life had to offer I'd prolly be coked out of my mind all the time, too.
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 12:38 PM
|
I'm not, by any means, the self-appointed defender of hospitals and doctors. However, I would like to say this in response to those who are bashing the doctor and/or facility who released Britney: If Britney really wanted to leave, all she had to do was sign herself out AMA ("Against Medical Advice"). I have no direct experience with that, and admit I'm getting that info from the days when I watched ER, but I believe it is accurate.
If Britney really wanted to get the heck out, I believe she could have by signing the right papers and then the hospital would have no choice but to let her leave.
But I might be wrong on that, maybe psych wards are different - but it's what I assume. So please don't bash on me now for stating my opinion/assumption. If someone has experience with this somehow and can let me know that it is different in a psych ward then please let me know nicely.
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 12:47 PM
|
|
idahogirl, I believe you are right. You can be ruled incapacitated by surgery, illness, etc. to have someone take charge of your financial and business interests, but it is very difficult to prove complete mental incapacity and force someone to seek psychiatric help. Unless they can prove she is capable of hurting her children or herself, I don't think there's anything anyone can do, unless she is arrested for drug possession, dui. Then a judge can enforce a stay in rehab, I think. I may be wrong.......
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 12:53 PM
|
|
Thanks for the backup, ctheslayer!
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 12:58 PM
|
I'm single and in my early 40's, and being that I know very few people my age who aren't married I find that my social circle is primarily in their mid 20's to mid 30's. I love them, but the things these "kids" prioritize. They all talk about what plastic surgery they are getting done, they judge people strictly by their looks and their money and therefore feel lithe pressure to be perfect. There's no interest in intellectual discussion or pursuits.....it's just all about image, image, image.
Oh yes, that's us 20-and-30-somethings, vapid and vain. Every last one of us. Don't worry though, as soon as we turn 40, we'll suddenly go through rapid maturation and never say anything stupid ever again.
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 1:02 PM
|
|
Dianora, I don't believe ctheslayer was saying that all of us in our 20's or 30's are like that. But there are a lot in this day and age and that's the point she was trying to make. I've always found ctheslayer's posts to be very smart, informative and reasonable. I think you just took it the wrong way.
|
|
Feb 7, 2008 1:12 PM
|
|
|
