Should this be allowed?

[arella]

Originally Posted by sybarite

I think the paparazzi is one of the things that's pushing her over the edge. I wish there could be some type of harassment law when it comes to those vultures. I hope she doesn't end up like Princess Di.

Well said!

[arella]

Originally Posted by JustAnotherFace

We definitely disagree there. Whether or not they had reason or authority to do this aside, you will never convince me that the courts have everyones best interests in life and want us all to succeed.



Federlane, after all his fancy bills, pulled in a whopping $7,000 (appx.) in 2007. And the courts recently gave him full custody of the children. He should do his part, but all he'll end up doing is a half-ass job of raising his kids and racking up on the child-support money.

The courts do the best they can and sinse it was a concerned family memeber.....

Yes but I bet he gets a heft child support check

I do hope she gets stable and gets her kids back.

[essex boy]

Originally Posted by AutumnRain

if its to protect her and her assets from being taken advantage of then yes..

I'd like take a good look at her assets

[indianajoe]

isnt it funny how most the time those who say they are looking out for YOUR interests...are the ones who hope to profit from those interests ?

[sybarite]

Originally Posted by indianajoe

isnt it funny how most the time those who say they are looking out for YOUR interests...are the ones who hope to profit from those interests ?

So true!!

[JustAnotherFace]

Originally Posted by indianajoe

isnt it funny how most the time those who say they are looking out for YOUR interests...are the ones who hope to profit from those interests ?

Kinda one of the points I've been trying to make.

Though there's a lot of good points and interesting views on here.

And I definitely agree that the paparazzi are a big part of the problem.

[Alaskan John]

Unfortunately there are a large number of individuals and groups of highly predatory people who seek out incompetent persons with financial and property assets in the community for the specific purpose of obtaining that person’s money and assets – often moving in to obtain free housing, food, and access to prescription drugs. These people often even design to conceal their prey’s incompetence so as to avoid anyone petitioning to impose a conservator or guardian.

A conservator, at least in Alaska, is legally responsible only for protecting the finances and assets of an individual who may still make their own decisions in all other matters, including medical decisions, licensing, lifestyle, etc providing the assets and finances aren’t in unreasonable jeopardy of being misused or illegally acquired. The conservator generally is supposed to allow as much control by the individual as reasonable, and to increase that control as skills and other competency issues improve. The protected individual is free to petition the court at any time to request a change in conservator, or even to terminate the court order requiring such oversight at any time, although the burden of showing that oversight is no longer required is on the petitioner seeking termination of the order.

There are also licensed private agencies or individuals that provide conservator services for a fee – a group of private agencies which sadly has a very checkered past up here, among which are the good, the bad, and the ugly ones. (e.g. – the private guardian who used a client’s trust funds to purchase a Jaguar sports car even though the client was medically ineligible to even obtain a driver’s license. The guardian then arranged for the client to sell the Jaguar for an obscenely low percentage of the vehicle’s true market value. Can you guess who the purchaser was? Yup – the guardian himself. At least this one ended up in court and had a legally and morally appropriate ending!).

The third main group of private conservators and guardians up here is family members. With extremely disappointing frequency, family members turn out to be as predatory as any other private sources or even more so. Don’t get me wrong though – other times, the family member is a true gem of an individual.

For the reasons above and others, I absolutely believe in the need and appropriateness of court-appointed conservators. The concept is sound, but I also believe much more oversight and accountability of private conservators and guardians is needed up here, for which adequate funding doesn’t yet seem to be forthcoming from any identified sources.

Even though I am generally opposed to government intrusion into our personal lives any more than necessary, I am a big believer in the public (government funded, vs. private enterprise) conservator and guardian agency up here, except that it is woefully understaffed to meet the demand. I know many of these public conservators and guardians personally, and their character and motivation is being seriously mischaracterized in this thread. There is no financial incentive to boost enrollment in this government program – it is already overworked and under funded. These state conservators and guardians charge not more than $20US last I heard (about $21AU, 12.7 euros, or 10 GB Pounds) per month which is returned to the state’s general operating budget, and many or most of the clients pay no fee. Their funds are managed from individual trust accounts, and the conservator must comply with court reporting requirements including regular accounting reports and an annual (I think) audit of the account and other assets.

I hope this information is useful to the furtherance of this very interesting debate – every side has a story to tell! Great debate topic JAF!

[Vinnie]

A couple of points to think about.
She may not have much money at this point in time. Very often entertainment contracts are tied up in loops and it can be difficult for the artist to be paid.

Secondly, it may be the situation that she herself has aquiesed to this. I do not know the ins and outs of the story (and frankly am rather bored by it all, I have no voyeuristic pleasure here) but it stirikes me that the courts would not have stepped in here without some party asking them to. My father has acted in such a role for clients who have got themselves in difficulties with money (although not to such a high profile person) but he has had to "look after" the finances of folk who couild not do it themselves.

[JustAnotherFace]

Originally Posted by Vinnie

A couple of points to think about.
She may not have much money at this point in time. Very often entertainment contracts are tied up in loops and it can be difficult for the artist to be paid.

Secondly, it may be the situation that she herself has aquiesed to this. I do not know the ins and outs of the story (and frankly am rather bored by it all, I have no voyeuristic pleasure here) but it stirikes me that the courts would not have stepped in here without some party asking them to. My father has acted in such a role for clients who have got themselves in difficulties with money (although not to such a high profile person) but he has had to "look after" the finances of folk who couild not do it themselves.

I'm not privy to the details either, and I would look at it a little differently if she were the one to have asked for this. But, I just don't think that that is the case.

[Vinnie]

Like almost everything suroundimng the poor girl, anything she does just exploes onto the papers. I do not read about it since I really don't care. Not that I'm hard to her plight but if I cared about what she was doing, I'd be feeding the media frenzy.