Future Lovers 6,545 Posted December 28, 2023 Share Posted December 28, 2023 This seems to be strikingly different than the Britney situation. First and foremost, Cher is the one with more money and relevance going into this situation. She doesn't need to leach off of her son for money. She's Cher. Second of all, this isn't a snap decision. He's had a history of serious drug abuse for years, and it appears she has tried many many times to give him the chance to fix it on his own. It isn't as if she's doing this at the first sign of smoke, this fire has been destroying his life for years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natalia Kills 377 Posted December 28, 2023 Share Posted December 28, 2023 Fair play to Cher, it’s in the best interests of her child. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolf Boy 3,167 Posted December 28, 2023 Share Posted December 28, 2023 20 hours ago, Mirrion Rizzons said: hmmmmm On the one hand its cher - she 'seems' to have her son's best interest at heart, and obviously Its not like a britney situation as she already has tons of her own money. But I don't understand the need for conservatorships, they just give the conservator way too much control over a persons life I understand if she's concerned, but he's 47, he does not need someone controlling his finances and legal decisions, He’s a drug addict clearly on the path of ruining his life. Not sure what part of that is hard to understand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madame Goo Goo 3,690 Posted December 28, 2023 Share Posted December 28, 2023 20 hours ago, weed said: Are you saying because someone is 47 they must be capable of managing their funds? people married with kids have ruined their lives because of financial irresponsibility, gambling, even without drugs involved. That doesn’t give anyone the right to have complete access over the life of a full grown person. It is wrong in principle. It was wrong with Britney, and it is wrong here. Not everybody can be saved, not everybody wants to be saved, and not everybody needs to be saved. It is a part of life. Lady Gaga doesn't owe us anything Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
butthole 9,785 Posted December 28, 2023 Share Posted December 28, 2023 26 minutes ago, Madame Goo Goo said: That doesn’t give anyone the right to have complete access over the life of a full grown person. It is wrong in principle. It was wrong with Britney, and it is wrong here. Not everybody can be saved, not everybody wants to be saved, and not everybody needs to be saved. It is a part of life. translation: "she should stand by watch her son slowly kill himself" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hELXIG 41,866 Posted December 29, 2023 Share Posted December 29, 2023 Because it's Cher and she has a very long history of being a pretty good person, I'm inclined to assume this must be a last-ditch effort to protect her son from the extreme effects of drug addiction.. hopefully I'll be myself until they fūcking close the coffin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.