Jump to content

Cher files for conservatorship of her son; UPDATE: Denied.


Recommended Posts

Posted
30 minutes ago, Cap87 said:

I'm giving Cher the side eye

 

 

 

Not Britney stans thinking they're the authority on conservatorships now. Even in Britney's case they don't know what really happened. She says she never did recreational drugs in her book, for example. Who knows if that's true. What makes you think they know what's really happening with Cher and her son? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 9
  • Thumbs Down 1

  • Replies 167
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Cap87

    13

  • Jeremiah

    8

  • Vermillion

    5

  • dumbsparce

    3

Posted
5 hours ago, Bimbo said:

Some of y’all really read “conservatorship” and the monkey clapping in your empty head just goes “Britney!!” “money!!” “bad!!” :hoetenks:

:ahh:

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Beyonnaise said:

It’s so weird how people extracted Britney’s case to mean every single conservatorship is oppressive and evil. Clearly some instances warrant one, like severe mental illness and yes, deadly drug addiction. I can’t comment on Cher’s case specifically but it certainly is different than Britney’s situation given that Cher has hundreds of millions of dollars on her own and her son is financially reliant on her.

You can't just strip people of their rights cause you don't wanna deal with your family problems like regular folk, y'all are insane. :rip:

Edited by Prodigal Self
  • Like 4
  • Thumbs Down 3
Posted
9 hours ago, LatinFreak said:

Cher is mom. Ans mom knows best. 

Stares in Gypsy Rose

  • Like 1
Posted

Some people in here are way off the mark.

 

I generally agree, yes, conservatorships should not be common, and not a first step in dealing with people with mental health issues. However, some cases do warrant them.

 

As soon as I read that Elijah could spend all of his father's inheritance on drugs? Yes. That warrants a conservatorship, because with how old his mother is, this shows he's deep into the throws of addiction and could deplete his resources after she's no longer here.

 

There is no power imbalance, shady people behind the scenes or anything like that, and Cher does not need money. She wants to save her son. That's it.

 

Conservatorships are designed to protect the interests of conservatees and for people who cannot care for themselves.

 

If you are actively jepoardizing your financial security by blowing through your money on drugs? You cannot care for yourself, and a conservator could act to protect your finances.

 

Of course, not every person who is an addict should be under a conservatorship. I think in this unique situation, it is warranted.

  • Like 4
  • Thumbs Down 2
Posted

Britney's c-ship was a trap to have her become a (then probably permanent) cash machine for her dad, this is a WHOLE different scenario.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Britney case is exceptional but go out in the real world you will understand why conservatorship is needed.

A junkie family member cannot function well on their own. If you know any junkie, drug addict, you will see.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Katamari said:

Why does this have four pages :deadbanana4:

 

her son is a know drug addict and it sounds like she’s trying to save him from financial ruin and trying to get him some help :michael:

True but people who have read her other son/daughter(?) memoir say she was a terrible mother.

Posted
3 hours ago, Popboi. said:

Britney's c-ship was a trap to have her become a (then probably permanent) cash machine for her dad, this is a WHOLE different scenario.

Cash machine for the California Court System who too has been robbing Britney Spears estate too and still is.

  • Thumbs Down 2
Posted
6 hours ago, Jewel said:

 

Not Britney stans thinking they're the authority on conservatorships now. Even in Britney's case they don't know what really happened. She says she never did recreational drugs in her book, for example. Who knows if that's true. What makes you think they know what's really happening with Cher and her son? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I see Cher working with the same California Court system that ILLEGALLY put and kept Britney in a fraudulent conservatorship she was never qualified for. 

 

I'm giving Cher the side eye

  • Thumbs Down 1
Posted

not people here acting like Cher is after his money :rip:. sorry but that Allman Brothers band money isn't much in 2023. especially when he shares it with multiple other inheritors 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)

I would side eye less if she petitioned to be the conservator of the person but taking away a addicts money isn’t going to stop them from being a addict. It’s going to force them into more dangerous situations. Conservatorships are being tossed around like candy in LA and I don’t agree with it. 
 

I love Cher but I’m so disappointed. If there wasn’t money to be made no judge or lawyer  would blink a eye at this case. LA is full of addicts that the state doesn’t care about. A conservatorship is a extreme step. I don’t agree with it. 


It’s also disappointing that after 4 years of conservatorships being wildly discussed in media that there are still people justifying it like it’s not a person losing their human rights. **** off. 

Edited by WhateverYouWant
  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Down 5
Posted
14 hours ago, Save-Me-Oprah said:

Yeah I’m sure fuckin Cher is after her drug addict son’s money 

 

spacer.png

  

16 hours ago, Shinning said:

I mean it's not like he must have that much money that isn't hers.

This isn't a Britney situation at all. Britney was the family's breadwinner. Cher is that in hers.

 

16 hours ago, Raptus said:

you think THE Cher needs his 5.99$? :priceless:

Not Cher dumb asses , the lawyers and the cult-like system in Hollywood (who puts you into drugs and parties in the first place). Do the math. 4tBYgJh.thumb.gif.b009d8c13dc506323d1b31

  • Thumbs Down 2
Posted

Cher knows her time on Earth is getting shorter and shorter, so for her to want to limit her resources to her kid because she KNOWS he's an addict who would most likely die of overdose once he had full access to her money is actually responsible

Posted
31 minutes ago, Totami Legend said:

  

 

Not Cher dumb asses , the lawyers and the cult-like system in Hollywood (who puts you into drugs and parties in the first place). Do the math. 4tBYgJh.thumb.gif.b009d8c13dc506323d1b31

Well, you stan a high-functioning alcoholic so you would know something about that

 

:suburban:

Posted

some of yall do realise that you can't enrol someone into a rehabilitation programme if they don't actually want to go themselves? trying to help someone that doesn't want to get better is exhausting because there's only so many times you can have the same damn conversation with them. It probably makes her feel a lot better knowing that any money she gives him will go to the necessities like rent and food other than more drugs.

Posted

checked his pics and he looks pretty good for a drug addict to me??

 

c050d1196ed569f8.jpeg

 

 

wheres the bad skin, weird nose etc?

  • Confused 1
  • Thumbs Down 2
Posted (edited)

Bottom line is, she has her own money. And the son’s money most likely comes from her if he is a druggy. I support her decision. She’s not doing it to get money from her son since the money came from her. It’s clearly out of motherly love. I hope he gets better

 

 

ot: he is ******* hot!

Edited by What_A_Mess
  • Thanks 1
Posted

I support women conservatorshipping men. :lakitu:

Posted
19 hours ago, wehan6 said:

well this is unfair sis. she's a musician, going out and promoting her new album is literally part of her job. just because she's working and isn't by his side 24/7 doesn't mean she doesn't care about him

Mitch Winehouse said the same. 

Posted

I am sorry, but some of you are really looking damn stupid looking at conservationships exclusively through the Britney lens :deadbanana2: Conservationships shouldn’t be thrown around easily, yes, but this doesn't seem to be Cher's initial response to her son's situation, but rather a last resort.

 

 

  • Thanks 3
Posted
9 hours ago, Cap87 said:

Cash machine for the California Court System who too has been robbing Britney Spears estate too and still is.

That’s not how it works.

Posted

If someone's practice of their rights will lead them to death, as it is the case with drug addicts, then yeah stripping them away from said rights for a certain period of time is the only way they'll survive. Stop trying to paint a parent doing anything possible to protect their child as evil.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Popboi. said:

That’s not how it works.

They illegally put her and kept her in that fraudulent conservatorship and would have kept her in there if she did not do her testimony.

 

Alot of Britney money is missing under their watch

 

Unseal those documents

Posted

Conservatorships are fine if they’re in the hands of family who can be trusted.

 

This isn’t comparable to Britney. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.