Staff Contact

Jason
Karen
Roxie

Login / Register

Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
A Dangerous Time
Written by Karen   
February 5, 2008
A guy was driving into a mental hospital when suddenly one of the wheels fell off of his car. He got out and found that the wheel was lying there but the wheelnuts had all gotten lost down a drain. What to do? A patient was watching out of a tiny open window. "If you take one nut off of each of the other wheels you could put the wheel back on!" he suggested. The visitor's surprise at this smart solution must have shown on his face because the inmate laughed loudly. "We're in here for being crazy, not for being stupid!"

 

That's the problem with psychiatric facilities. They often confuse a tendency to occasional manic episodes with an overall mental incompetence that includes an inability ever to think clearly and thus to take important decisions concerning a patient's own life.

 

To make matters worse, mental health professionals acknowledge that people admitted to these facilities become "institutionalised" in only 3 weeks. That means in effect that they surrender responsibility for their lives to their carers. And that makes full recovery to independent living and decision-making a very lengthy process. In some cases the institutionalisation becomes permanent.

 

Most tests of psychological competence focus on consistency, "joined up thinking" if you like, to show that a subject's mind is functioning in a way that allows for competent decision-taking and the assumption of responsibility. If a person's consciousness seems to present itself as a series of disconnected episodes, it would be judged that his/her cognitive functions were significantly impaired.

 

But Britney's brain has worked like this for a very long time. After considering the behavioristic evidence, I wrote in 2005 that throughout every waking hour...idea after idea rockets into her mind. But it's like she's a radio receiver auto-tuning over a hundred wavebands. There's no real consistency or continuity or logic. The same idea may occur more than once, or many times, but it's like finding the same song playing on several stations. There doesn't seem to be a central, co-ordinating mechanism that pulls everything together and turns it into one coherent history or story or personality. She changes her mind with breathtaking frequency, and sometimes she tries too hard to make harsh reality fit her fairy tale. The only thing that ever made a consistent thread in her whole life story was her intense focus on her career. But now that has gone.

 

Can the psychiatrists treating her now do their work so well as to give greater consistency and continuity to her cognitive function than she had before anyone even had suspicions that she was mentally ill? It seems unlikely. So how are they going to decide that she's competent to take decisions? Already it appears that Britney has lost the battle to convince the authorities that she's competent to make her own choice of lawyer! It seems that she's already being taken down the long, dark road towards loss of her independence. Yet bipolarity - if that's what's wrong with her - is usually associated with emotional problems, not with loss of reasoning ability. Could it be that her strange way of thinking is already telling against her?

 

My fear is that, if we don't see her released from psychiatric care after the present 14 days, we may not see her again as an independent adult for a very long time - if ever. And as for seeing her again as Britney Spears, megastar......?

Comments (11)Add Comment
...
written by Stardom, February 07, 2008
Heh, well you got your wish today and little miss BRITney, yep the accent is back, has sprung outta there and is currently at home with her parents and Adnan.

I see you're back to your sheepy way of looking at everything.

Why in Gods name are you even thinking about when we'll next see "Britney Spears" again? Who the fuck cares when she's mentally GONE?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Karen, February 10, 2008
Sheepy? So who am I following with this blog? It seems to me that most of the "sheep" - if by that you mean non-hating mainstream fans - were saying "Oh isn't it GREAT that she's getting treatment! Keep her in there!!" And they all seemed to be disappointed and frustrated when she got out. I put an independent point of view, which I stand over. Which is that if they are trying to cure her EMOTIONAL problems, such as bipolarity, why detain her in the kind of institution that normally deals with COGNITIVE malfunctions?

I'm beginning to wonder if you ever take the trouble to think things through before you fire off one of your missives. The expression "see" Britney Spears was a figure of speech. I could have put it in other ways, such as "She may not be x,y,z etc......" but i really didn't think i would have to.

You really have a most amazingly perverse way of looking at things and I'm beginning to wonder why I take the trouble to respond to your bilious attacks.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Stardom, February 10, 2008
Sheepy as in "What are those bad, bad people doing to her in that mean old asylum?". You're too far in now to really see how blinded you are by her fame.

You didn't go with other sheeps general (logical for once) reaction - you started doubting the ethics of a hospital! And one that specifically deals with bipolarity. Again, I suggest you read BB for news because you appear to be getting it from unreliable sources. A thread was posted on BB explaining exactly what the hospital deals with and one of its main "diseases" was bipolarity.

Of course I think things through before posting, "Oh great, another "it happened TO her not BECAUSE of her post on Britology - woot".
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Karen, February 11, 2008
I wish you would explain exactly what the hell you want Britney to do. OK, let's go with your agenda that everything in her life is "her own fault". And I hope you don't think that's a unique or original insight, because half the people on half the sites I visit keep parrotting "It's her own fault! It's her own fault!!!" as if it mattered a damn that blame has been suitably attributed.

You think she can heal herself? Personally, I doubt it. I think that from here on in, people WILL be doing things to her and (if you read the full Rolling Stone article) it seems like they always have.

So what would make the Great Non-Sheep happy? Do you want her to declare publicly that there's nothing wrong with her, and she's just a stupid, selfish bitch who doesn't care if she gets her kids back and prefers to drink Starbucks? Or should she tell those dumb UCLA doctors (who were so deluded as to release her) that she's clinically insane even if THEY think she isn't?

I'm happy that her dad has taken control. I'm happy that she's living at home with her dad and he's controlling who she sees. I'm happy that she goes to the Millennium Dance Studio. I'm happy that she has a bodyguard now and isn't relying on paps to defend her. Tiny little steps, maybe. But what is your great alternative plan?

And if you're going to go off on a tirade every time somebody uses a figure of speech like "when will we see her looking normal again?" as if this meant "Ohhhh...... I haven't seen her for 3 days, what am I gonna do??!!" I am not about to accept your assurances that you think before you write.

Can you not bear to read opinions that diverge from your own? You seem incredibly determined to bully everyone into following your point of view. Like.....er..... sheep, maybe?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Stardom, February 12, 2008
I wish you would explain exactly what the hell you want Britney to do. OK, let's go with your agenda that everything in her life is "her own fault". And I hope you don't think that's a unique or original insight, because half the people on half the sites I visit keep parrotting "It's her own fault! It's her own fault!!!" as if it mattered a damn that blame has been suitably attributed.


Lol, it's like you're shocked that anything could be her own fault. I don't doubt she was used and cheated as a teen but she said herself she was getting stronger in the Dateline interview - what the hell happened?

She started to become her own woman and take charge in a healthy way, then everything went down the drain the minute she didn't have a man in her life.

You wonder why I think everything is her own fault yet I don't know how you think a 26 year old woman isn't responsible for herself and her actions (before the drugs Osama gave her came into effect of course...remember a lot of the craziness had begun WAY before she met Sam, so don't cling to that like most of the sheep are now).

You think she can heal herself? Personally, I doubt it. I think that from here on in, people WILL be doing things to her and (if you read the full Rolling Stone article) it seems like they always have.


No, I don't think she can heal herself because she doesn't want to. A person can only change when they really want to. I never said I wanted her to "heal herself" anyway. I do want her well again but I want HER to want that.

So what would make the Great Non-Sheep happy? Do you want her to declare publicly that there's nothing wrong with her, and she's just a stupid, selfish bitch who doesn't care if she gets her kids back and prefers to drink Starbucks? Or should she tell those dumb UCLA doctors (who were so deluded as to release her) that she's clinically insane even if THEY think she isn't?


I would appreciate if she stayed home for a few goddamn weeks and actually WENT to court to fight for her kids. They're gonna find out all of this one day, you know.

I never said she was clinically insane but it blows my mind that the hospital thought she was ready to leave after 5 damn days. It doesn't matter if she's not a danger...she seems to calm down eventually then slowly build back up to the meltdowns anyway.

I'm happy that her dad has taken control. I'm happy that she's living at home with her dad and he's controlling who she sees. I'm happy that she goes to the Millennium Dance Studio. I'm happy that she has a bodyguard now and isn't relying on paps to defend her. Tiny little steps, maybe. But what is your great alternative plan?


I'm happy with all of those things too. But you have to understand that things happen at lightning speed in Britneyworld these days and at the time of writing my reply, she was again driving aimlessly around L.A yapping away in that psycho British accent. I'm VERY happy with the recent changes, although I honestly hope they're what SHE truly wants and isn't just waiting to get Allie and Sam back the minute her parents leave.

And if you're going to go off on a tirade every time somebody uses a figure of speech like "when will we see her looking normal again?" as if this meant "Ohhhh...... I haven't seen her for 3 days, what am I gonna do??!!" I am not about to accept your assurances that you think before you write.


I judge by what I see written in front of me. You don't want people to think a certain way about what you write? Don't write it that way then. Anyway, I didn't even interpret that part the way you think I did...I meant how can anyone worry about "Britney Spears" or her career at a time like this. Especially someone who's so madly in love with her, like you.


Can you not bear to read opinions that diverge from your own? You seem incredibly determined to bully everyone into following your point of view. Like.....er..... sheep, maybe?


Of course I can. But not insane posts pointing the finger at doctors and hospitals that have a chance of making her well again!

Why would you write such a condescending post towards the one place where you might get your old Britney back again?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Karen, February 14, 2008
There's nothing condescending about it. I pointed out a danger that could have occurred if she'd stayed in there too long. The doctors in charge of psychiatric facilities are aware of the danger of institutionalisation too, which is one of the reasons they don't detain people longer than they have to. But my blog wasn't written for doctors. It was written for "fans" who seemed to think the very best thing in the whole wide world would be if Britney was kept in a padded room for 6 months. How, exactly, would that contribute to her mental wellbeing?

I love how you toss words like "insane" around so carelessly. Thoughtlessly, even. So I'm insane now because I voiced an opinion you didn't want to hear? It's no wonder you seem a little confused about the reasons for Britney's behavior and how much she should be blamed. It's like a mental disorder is some kind of designer excuse - is that what you think? This thing that "she can't heal herself because she doesn't want to" is just another weasly way of saying that.

I once mangled my left hand in an accident with the top hitch on a tractor (see, I actually MANAGE sheep) and I would have LOVED and DEARLY WANTED to stitch it all back together myself and hope my family would never find out that it happened. But I didn't have the knowledge, the skills, the equipment, or the medication. I think you'll find that healing mental injuries is similar. You don't just "wish and make it so". Celeb writer J. Randy Taraborrelli, writing about Britney 4 years ago, noted that her friends felt she had been permanently damaged by the breakup with Timberlake. He detailed various instances of behavior that showed a woman on the edge of a breakdown. The only wonder is that it took so long.

So I try to resist galloping around on a high horse like you do. I try not to be sanctimonious like you are. I try to be warm, and compassionate, and understanding - like you are not. Let me quote Janet Jackson: "I don't think it's fair for people to be so judgmental because we don't know what [young actors/musicians] are feeling," she says. "You read what people want you to know or want you to think but to really know what's going on in her heart and soul and her mind; no one knows that unless they were to sit down and possibly, hopefully, speak to her. Then, maybe they'd be able to understand a glimpse of it."

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Stardom, February 16, 2008
It was written for "fans" who seemed to think the very best thing in the whole wide world would be if Britney was kept in a padded room for 6 months. How, exactly, would that contribute to her mental wellbeing?


Believe me, NO ONE thinks or wants that. We want her to get help, get out of the spotlight and get her babies back.

I still don't see the purpose of this whole post except to act like Britney was wrongfully put into medical care.

I love how you toss words like "insane" around so carelessly. Thoughtlessly, even. So I'm insane now because I voiced an opinion you didn't want to hear? It's no wonder you seem a little confused about the reasons for Britney's behavior and how much she should be blamed. It's like a mental disorder is some kind of designer excuse - is that what you think? This thing that "she can't heal herself because she doesn't want to" is just another weasly way of saying that.


LOL. Just keep spinning my words until you're so far away from the actual meaning you have no clue what you're talking about.

And occasionally, you do seem a little over the top. I mean, you thought that Baby Boy song was going to change the way everyone viewed Kevin Federline, Britney's vocal skills and Kevin's parenting skills. HA! Please. What is it with hardcore Britney fans trying to tone down all the extreme stuff that happens and trying to sensationalize all the random meaningless stuff?

Oh and for the record, I'm not confused at all about Britney's behavior. It's part a result of Sam, part a result of her own stubbornness and immaturity. Simple.

I try to be warm, and compassionate, and understanding - like you are not.


You try.

You just end up sounding blind, weak, clueless and naive.

"You read what people want you to know or want you to think but to really know what's going on in her heart and soul and her mind; no one knows that unless they were to sit down and possibly, hopefully, speak to her. Then, maybe they'd be able to understand a glimpse of it."


So stop presuming you know more than me then. If Jackson is so correct, why are you doing the same thing?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Karen, February 20, 2008
I can see that you're not even thinking now, you're just ranting.

Why do you immediately identify yourself with the "fans" that I said wanted to keep her locked up? Why do you call them "we"? If that was not your view, I wasn't talking to you. Back at the time the blog was written, many people were ranting and raving about the "irresponsible" decision of UCLA to release Britney. Some of them were saying "She should be kept in a mental facility till she's well".

Anyway, you're clearly not one of those because you don't think she's mentally ill at all. It was just Sam's bag of goodies plus stubbornness and immaturity. Oh well then! She's been away from Sam for a while so I guess she must be cured by now! Fire the conservators! Why do you want her to get "help"? A good stiff talking-to about her abysmal failings as a human being should do the trick!

If I'm so far away from the meaning of "She can't heal herself because she doesn't want to" then just what the hell does it mean? It's nothing more a fine-sounding, self-serving, empty phrase that deluded judgmentalists use to hide their arrogance and meanness of nature. People who think they're mostly superior to others always come up with bullsh*t like that.

And as for the "Baby Boy" song - I'm pretty sure my thoughts on the matter were that it could have been the first shot in a campaign by Britney to change perceptions of Kevin and of herself. Which is somewhat different from my allegedly claiming that this was a song that would change the world.

Janet Jackson's remark was about the ongoing judgmental commentary on young actors and musicians. You edited it in your usual self-serving, would-be cunning way to change its whole applicability. Did you think nobody would notice? And you have the nerve to talk about me twisting YOUR words!!! I'm sure I've told you this before, but it bears repeating: if you want to be a smartass, it would help if you were smart.

It doesn't surprise me that a compassionate and understanding person would come over as "blind, weak, clueless and naive" to you. You sound like a follower of Nietzsche. However, I have to tell you that the concept of the "Ubermensch" has been thoroughly discredited with the demise of the Nazi Party. And a response along the lines of "What the **** are you talking about" will not be good enough if you still want to act all superior.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Stardom, February 24, 2008
I can see that you're not even thinking now, you're just ranting.


Heh, well, welcome to my world whenever I read one of your articles.

Why do you immediately identify yourself with the "fans" that I said wanted to keep her locked up? Why do you call them "we"? If that was not your view, I wasn't talking to you. Back at the time the blog was written, many people were ranting and raving about the "irresponsible" decision of UCLA to release Britney. Some of them were saying "She should be kept in a mental facility till she's well".


I never said anywhere I wasn't a fan. I'm a HUGE fan. But of course I wouldn't seem like one to you because I'm okay with giving Britney a bit of tough love when she needs it. I'm OVER THE MOON she now gets to see her kids again and that everything FINALLY seems to be permanently good again. I almost didn't write back to this because why keep fighting over the past when the future seems to be in clear view now? See? I am a fan.

Anyway, you're clearly not one of those because you don't think she's mentally ill at all. It was just Sam's bag of goodies plus stubbornness and immaturity. Oh well then! She's been away from Sam for a while so I guess she must be cured by now! Fire the conservators! Why do you want her to get "help"? A good stiff talking-to about her abysmal failings as a human being should do the trick!


It could've been those two things - and we all know how stubborn and young Britney is in her mind so why not? Why has everything turned positive now that her enabler friends are gone and she has rules she has to follow again? Hmm? Why? And yes she does seem better now that Sam is gone so I don't know where you're getting the idea that I want the conservators gone. They're doing her good. The fuck is wrong with you? YOU'RE ranting in the last few sentences of this quote.

If I'm so far away from the meaning of "She can't heal herself because she doesn't want to" then just what the hell does it mean? It's nothing more a fine-sounding, self-serving, empty phrase that deluded judgmentalists use to hide their arrogance and meanness of nature. People who think they're mostly superior to others always come up with bullsh*t like that.


Re-read it, honey. I said you were far from the meaning of what I said, not what YOU said.

And as for the "Baby Boy" song - I'm pretty sure my thoughts on the matter were that it could have been the first shot in a campaign by Britney to change perceptions of Kevin and of herself. Which is somewhat different from my allegedly claiming that this was a song that would change the world.


It wasn't even a full song for God's sake. That wasn't the only post where the writers here have orgasmed over the thoughts of "what she might dooooo!!!!!" then fallen on their faces once she's either failed or done something completely different. Like that nudity article, where you were expecting some HOT ASS BRITNEY to be exposed and instead we got Mr C Section Scar spread eagled over the net. Oh but those shots were STOLEN from her weren't they? Do you see why I don't take you seriously?






report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Stardom, February 24, 2008
Janet Jackson's remark was about the ongoing judgmental commentary on young actors and musicians. You edited it in your usual self-serving, would-be cunning way to change its whole applicability. Did you think nobody would notice? And you have the nerve to talk about me twisting YOUR words!!! I'm sure I've told you this before, but it bears repeating: if you want to be a smartass, it would help if you were smart.


Oh please, it's not like I didn't read the whole quote, and I only left out one tiny line that didn't have anything to do with what I was going to say and didn't add or take anything away from Janet's message. Plus because of your fucked up word limit here I have to try and shorten everything on here.

Anyway, I wasn't twisting your words (or Janets for that matter).

I see you avoided what I said after I quoted her. One of your special talents.

It doesn't surprise me that a compassionate and understanding person would come over as "blind, weak, clueless and naive" to you.


Why? I've talked to many understanding and compassionate people when it comes to Britney. You're not one of them. You're BLIND. You're in denial and you were right up until it was impossible to be but even then you STILL make excuses for her CONSTANTLY and blame everyone but her. I'll even quote you to 100% prove you're blind :

"Not to knock Britney at all but..."

THERE. That simple quote speaks VOLUMES about the kind of fan you are.

You sound like a follower of Nietzsche. However, I have to tell you that the concept of the "Ubermensch" has been thoroughly discredited with the demise of the Nazi Party. And a response along the lines of "What the **** are you talking about" will not be good enough if you still want to act all superior.


Hmm...maybe it wasn't Britney they should have been strapping down that night...*backs away slowly* Do take a few deep breaths once in a while, or else you might end up shaving your head or something...o_O

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Karen, February 24, 2008
Well I guess that was just a more weasly and would-be superior way of saying "What the **** etc. etc." Which was just as I expected. Is an intelligent debate beyond your grasp? You keep hiding in rhetoric and abuse, which can only serve to raise suspicions.

I don't get why the necessity to "blame" someone figures so highly on your list of priorities. A girl with whom I have had many heated conversations about Britney and others has recently recanted from her judgmentalist stance and now deeply regrets it. She now realises that if somebody screws up, it's appropriate to comment on it as you see fit, then move on. But YOU still can't do that. You're STILL talking about "blame". Why? What the hell is the point of it? Where does it take us? I've asked you this scores of times, in scores of ways and I'm still awaiting an answer.

You still can't seem to get it into your head that "explanations" are different from "excuses". OK, I'll try to help. If you and your sheep are butting horns with me and my sheep in an argument, we may, in our various ways, find ourselves making remarks about something Britney has or has not done. In that situation, you will obviously be wanting to say "She did it! It's her fault! She's 100% to blame!" and we will be saying "But hang on, isn't it a legal truism that circumstances alter cases? Maybe there's a REASON why she did it?" We're as entitled to look for reasons as you are to say you don't care what reasons there are - which is what "there is no excuse" really means.

I didn't comment on what you said about Janet's quote because your editing made the quote irrelevant.

I don't think we on this site are alone in sticking our necks out about what may or may not happen. You've done it pretty often yourself, except in a negative way - always expecting the worst, saying that hatred was appropriate for her, that there was no point in writing about her any more etc. etc. And suddenly here we see you do a complete U-turn. YOU were blind and in denial that things could be turned around in Britney's life. Taking a sanctimonious, censorious and judgmental attitude doesn't make you any more perceptive or any less blind.

It's amusing how you keep changing your attitude so you can claim you are, and were always, right. I expressed concerns about the value of keeping her in an institution for long-term psychological rehab and you've been bashing me for weeks for it. But now that she's getting what I wanted - to be taken OUT of a mental facility and given care at home - suddenly you're deliriously happy with it too.

Inconsistencies, inconsistencies... every time. But you never answer those points with anything other than rhetoric.

You were the person who said "She can't heal herself because she doesn't want to", not me. So how did that suddenly become what I said? Try to concentrate, for goodness sake.

You also said "Oh and for the record, I'm not confused at all about Britney's behavior. It's part a result of Sam, part a result of her own stubbornness and immaturity. Simple." That looks like a denial that she needs any kind of psychiatric help, not an offering of thanks that she's getting it.

And as for the stuff about being a fan.... If you took the trouble to read and think about what I'm saying, you'd see that I was wondering why you were identifying yourself with a particular GROUP of fans and calling them "us" when your views were clearly very different from theirs.

I'm sorry that you're finding it so hard to debate with me on a rational level. It's all sounding like bluff and bluster now. Refusing to "take me seriously" - ha! Anyone who argues with you and doesn't accept The Gospel According to Stardom has to be insane, right? Claiming to be superior doesn't actually MAKE you superior. You have to prove it.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0

Write comment
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
< Prev   Next >
copyright.gif