In addition to many financial and personal controls that dictate Britney's life, the most troubling was her forced sterilization.
But her widely reviled father, Jamie Spears, insists that he's not really forcing Britney to keep an IUD.
Instead, he places the blame on Britney's other conservator, Jodi Montgomery.
Jodi has been Britney's co-conservator for about two years, now.
At the time, Jamie's severe health crisis left him unable to actively curtail his adult daughter's freedoms.
Jodi, a professional conservator, stepped in to fill that role.
On Wednesday, Jamie submitted documents to the court claiming to have "concern" about Jodi's work with Britney.
He allegedly worried that Jodi's management "does not reflect Ms. Spears' wishes."
Jamie has not served as Britney's personal conservator since September of 2019, and asks the court to look into the matter.
Jodi fired back in a strongly-worded statement from her attorney.
In the statement, it was asserted that Jodi has been "a tireless advocate" for Britney.
And Jodi went even further.
Jodi shared that she plans to present a care plan to the court.
That plan will include "a path to terminate" the conservatorship.
Despite Britney's most recent setback, this seems to be pathing the way for hope on her horizon.
Jodi's attorney also explained that Jamie's claims about Jodi being the source of all of Britney's troubles don't hold water.
The reason is that despite Jodi taking over as Britney's personal conservator, Jamie has retained (at least partial) control over Britney's fortune.
Few things in life are free, and if they're not free, that gives Jamie effective veto power over them.
Or, as Jodi's attorney put it:
"Practically speaking, since everything costs money, no expenditures can happen without going through Mr. Spears and Mr. Spears approving them," the statement read.
The statement continued: "Ms. Montgomery has advocated on Britney's behalf for any expenditures that Britney has requested."
Jodi's attorney's statement continued "as well as for expenditures recommended by Britney's medical team."
Then, the statement revealed: "Not every requested expenditure has been approved."
While that's not the same as coming right out and saying that Jodi tried to get Britney's IUD removed, that is clearly the implication.
So who is telling the truth here? Who is the good guy and who is the bad guy?
On the one hand, there are many unknowns and the court will have to investigate.
On the other hand, it seems extremely likely that many people in Britney's life who should have helped her have failed spectacularly.
Jamie pretending that the first 11 years of Britney's conservatorship don't count because he's only had partial control for two years ...
... That is simply absurd on its face.
At the same time, Britney also testified in court that she was unhappy with aspects of Jodi's management.
But anyone -- particularly a successful 39-year-old -- whose freedoms are being infringed upon by others will (and should) resent it.
Britney expressed a desire to sue her family -- including but not limited to her father -- in her testimony.
She also said that people involved in orchestrating her conservatorship frankly deserve prison.
Is it possible that Britney had the legal right to remove her IUD all along, but was deceived into believing that she could not?
Sure. But we do not yet know if that is what happened.
After many years of following Britney's case with great attention, the vast majority of her fans are reluctant to believe anything that comes from Jamie.