About Britney Spears Perturbing Conservatorship - #Michael Ayele (a.k.a) W

3. National Council on Disability An independent federal agency making recommendations to the President and Congress to enhance the quality of life for all Americans with disabilities and their families. September 9, 2021 W (AACL) Michael A. Ayele PO Box 20438 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Re: FOIA Request NCD-2021- 12 Dear W: This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, dated July 19, 2021, in which you requested: “My request for records are as follows. 1) What formal and informal ties exist between the National Council on Disability (NCD), the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the HHS Administration for Children and Families (ACF), the HHS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the HHS Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the HHS Administration for Community Living (ACL), the HHS National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), the Department of Veteran Affairs (V.A), the Department of Education (DoED) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS), the DoED Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), the National Home and Community-Based Services Quality Enterprise (NQE), the Developmental Disabilities Councils, University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities (UCEDDs), the Protection and Advocacy (P&A) organization, the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and your offices? Which undergraduate, graduate and law schools have Clyde E. Terry, Benro T. Ogunyipe, Billy W. Altom, Rabia Belt, James T. Brett, Bob Brown, Daniel M. Gade, Wendy S. Harbour, Neil Romano, Amged Soliman, Ana Torres-Davis, Anne Smmers, Phoebe Ball, Stacey S. Brown and Keith Woods previously attended and visited? What are their respective roles and responsibilities? How long have they been with the NCD? What are their annual salaries? 2) What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the NCD March 22nd 2018 report entitled Beyond Guardianship: Toward Alternatives That Promote Greater Self-Determination? ii Had the NCD previously informed the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO that they were going to lead a factfinding mission into the system of guardianship in the United States of America (U.S.A)? 1331 F Street, NW ■ Suite 850 ■ Washington, DC 20004 202-272-2004 Voice ■ 202-272-2022 Fax ■ www.ncd.gov

4. What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about guardianships and/or conservatorships generally involving a state-court determination that an “individual lacks the capacity to make decisions with respect to their health, safety, welfare, and/or property?” What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about guardianships entailing the “removal of rights protected by the U.S Constitution?” What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the NCD position that (i) the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) is applicable to guardianship proceedings, (ii) the need for assistance with activities of daily living or even making decisions does not give rise to a presumption of incapacity and (iii) guardianship should be a last resort that is imposed only after less restrictive alternatives have been determined to be inappropriate or ineffective? (See page 19 of the NCD March 22nd 2018 report.) What feedback were provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD finding that (i) “there is a lack of data on existing guardianships and newly filedguardianships,” (ii) “people with disabilities are widely and erroneously seen as less capable of making autonomous decisions,” (iii) “people with disabilities are often denied due process in guardianship proceedings,” (iv) “capacity determinations often lack a sufficient scientific or evidentiary basis,” (v) “guardianship is considered protective, but courts often fail to protect individuals,” (vi) “most states statutes require consideration of less-restrictive alternatives, but courts and others in the guardianship system often do little to enforce this requirement,” (vii) “every state has a process for restoration, but this process is rarely used and can be complex, confusing, and cost prohibitive?” (See pages 18 – 24 of the NCD March 22nd 2018 report.) What feedbacks were provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD recommending for (i) the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to collect data on whether or not the individuals they serve are subject to guardianship; (ii) states to be offered incentives and technical assistance with developing electronic filing and reporting systems that collect basic information about guardianships from the moment a petition is filed, (iii) the Department of Justice (DOJ), in collaboration with the HHS to issue guidance to states (specifically Adult Protective Services (APS) agencies and probate courts) on their legal obligations pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), (iv) the Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to create model supported decision making and powers-of-attorney forms geared toward transition age youth, (v) the Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) to instruct Parent Training and Information Centers to prioritize and provide meaningful training on school-toadult transition 2

5. and alternatives to guardianship, (vi) HHS to issue guidance regarding the responsibility of medical professionals and hospital to accommodate the needs of individuals who may need assistance making medical decisions, (vii) HHS to adequately explain procedures and draft documents provided to patients in plain language, (viii) medical professionals to be educated about the ADA and the need to accommodate people with disabilities, including those with intellectual disabilities and cognitive impairments, (ix) the National Home and Community Based Services Quality Enterprise (NQE) to include decision making assistance and use of alternatives to guardianship such as supported decision making in their priorities, (x) the NQE to include best practices as part of its resources, training, and technical assistance, (xi) the Administration for Community Living (ACL) to allocate funding to assist state adult protective services systems to develop greater awareness of ways to enhance the self-determination of adults considered vulnerable or in need of services, as well as the availability and use of alternatives to guardianship, (xii) the Developmental Disabilities Councils, University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities (UCEDDs), and the Protection and Advocacy (P&A) organization to link work that has been done on advancing the self-determination of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (ID/DD) with avoiding guardianship, (xiii) the Attorney General’s model legislation to incorporate the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship & Other Protective Arrangements Act (UGCOPAA) to include provisions for preventing unnecessary guardianships, (xiv) incapacitated individuals facing guardianship to be provided with independent legal representation that will advocate for the individual’s desired outcome, especially if that person expresses a desire to avoid guardianship or objects to the proposed guardian, (xv) federal grant money to be made available to help promote the availability of counsel, (xvi) a state guardianship court improvement program to be funded to assist courts with developing and implementing best practices in guardianship, including training of judges and court personnel on due process rights and less-restrictive alternatives, (xvii) the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), National Institutes of Health, and other agencies that fund scientific research to provide grants to researchers who are trying to develop a better understanding of how people make decisions and how a variety of conditions – such as dementia, intellectual disabilities, brain injuries, and other disabilities – impact the ability of individuals to make and implement informed decisions, (xviii) resources to be geared toward developing functional approaches to capacity assessments that take into account the possibility that someone may need decision making assistance but not necessarily a surrogate or substitute decision maker, (xix) states to be provided with incentives to establish statewide boards that can provide for the accreditation and oversight of professional guardians, (xx) states to require family guardians to undergo training to ensure they understand their ongoing responsibilities to the person subject to guardianship and to the court, (xxi) the ACL grants to be expanded to be able to fund more geographically and demographically diverse projects and pilots that specifically test SDM models and use SDM and the court systems to restore people’s rights as a matter of law, particularly for people who are older adults with cognitive decline, people with 3

6. psychosocial disabilities, and people with severe intellectual disabilities, (xxii) the DOJ to make funding available to train judges in the availability of alternatives to guardianship including, but not limited to, supported decision making, (xxiii)the DOJ to develop guidance that recognizes alternatives to guardianship (…) even when it is determined that the individual meets the definition of incapacity, (xxiv) a grant to be given to the Protection and Advocacy system to provide legal assistance to individuals who are trying to have their rights restored or avoid guardianship? (See pages 18 – 24 of the NCD March 22nd 2018 report.) What feedback were provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA),the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD March22nd 2018 report having noted that the way “capacity determinations are made is deeply problematic. Many states rely heavily on physicians and psychiatrists, who provide opinions that are based largely on generalities on a person’s diagnosis rather than on any observable trait of the particular individual. Although statutes that require a physician or psychiatrist to report to the court regarding the capacity of the individual are based on the assumption that these scientists will submit to the court an unbiased and scientifically based opinion, physicians and psychiatrists are often not trained in administering the kinds of tests that may provide the most insight into an individual’s ability to make decisions and might not have the requisite skills and experience with the particular disability to render a valid judgment. (…) Even if they have a clinical basis for determining what a person can or cannot do, the experts that make these determinations may not have sufficient legal context to determine whether the individual is incapacitated as the law defines it. In one study, only 30 percent of doctors were able to correctly apply the definition of legal competence (capacity) in a fact-pattern drawn from an actual legal case. Additionally, although psychiatrists were able to answer theoretical questions about the standards for legal capacity, they were often wrong when applying those standards to facts. In addition, only a small minority of doctors were able to understand that a person could be diagnosed with dementia or depression and still be legally competent. Medical doctors simply are trained in the legal, functional, and medical assessments that could lead to a reliable determination regarding an individual’scapacity. (…) Even in the best-case scenario in which a physician with relevant expertise is appointed, the medical profession’s relationship to disability has historically been a paternalistic one. In medical terms, a patient benefits from anything that reverses or ameliorates any disease or disability ‘…that threatens to shorten the life or limit the functional capacity of the patient. Harm is characterized as anything that impedes or compromises the efficacy of those diagnostic or therapeutic measures.’ This weighs heavily in favor of restricting autonomy in an attempt to ensure safety and may inevitably lead to overly restrictive guardianships?” (See pages 77 - 80 of the report.) What feedback wereprovided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), theNIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, theP&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD having noted in their March 22nd 2018report that “sexuality is an incredibly 4

7. fraught topic for people with disabilities that raises issues not only about consent and mental capacity, but also ‘the forced sterilization of people with disabilities, the rights of people with disabilities in institutions to have sex and be free from sexual abuse, and the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people with disabilities. Against this complex backdrop, NCD recognizes that ‘the desire to enter into intimate personal relationships, including sexual relationships, is one of the most personal rights there is’ and that ‘desire is no less important for the many adults with disabilities who are under some form of guardianship?’” (See page 106 of the report.) 3)What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the circumstances, which led to the much- publicized emotional duress and distress experienced by Britney Spears in 2007? Specifically, what communications in the form of emails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer November 13th 2003 interview of Britney Spears? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer noting on her interview with Britney Spears (dated November 13th 2003) that her net worth equated $100,000,000 (one hundred million) U.S dollars? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence having noted that Britney Spears idolized Madonna? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer asking for Britney Spears reaction to remarks made by Kendall Ehrlich (wife of the former governor of the State of Maryland) saying: “Really, if I had an opportunity to shootBritney Spears, I think I would?” What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears response to Diane Sawyer’s question? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer failing to forcefully condemn on Television (T.V) Kendall Ehrlich encouraging for Britney Spears to incur physical harm? iii What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the much-publicized decision of Britney Spears to cut her hair on February 16th 2007? iv What communications in the form ofe-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears having lost custody of her children with Kevin Federline on October 01st 2007? v What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears involuntary civil commitment in the month of January 2008? vi What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears and her estate being placed under the temporary control of her father (Jamie Spears) and Andrew Wallet on or around February 01st 2008? vii What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears having vocally objected to her father being appointed as a guardian of her person and her estate in 2008? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Jamie Spears having become the permanent guardian of Britney Spears in the month of October 2008? viii What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears net worth having decreased from over $100,000,000 (one hundred million) U.S dollars to $60,000,000 (sixty million) U.S dollars? What communications in the form of e- have you had about Diane Sawyer 5

8. mails and postal correspondence have you had about Jamie Spears having been paid at least $5 million since the start of Britney Spears conservatorship in 2008? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears having paid at least $3 million to Samuel D. Ingham since 2008? ix What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have been exchanged between the National Council on Disability (NCD) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about (i) the circumstances surrounding Britney Spears conservatorship, (ii) the money pocketed by Jamie Spears since the beginning of Britney Spears conservatorship and (iii) the money pocketed by Samuel D. Ingham for his representation of Britney Spears since the beginning of her conservatorship? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears having previously been informed that the terms and conditions of her conservatorship prohibited her to get married and have children? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the desire of Britney Spears (now aged 39 years old) to get married and have children? xi What songs of Britney Spears do you have on your cell-phone, your tablet, your laptop and other music listening devices? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you have you had about Britney Spears recently publicized decision to no longer perform in concerts? xii What I am requesting for prompt disclosure are all records within your possession detailing (1) formal and informal ties existing between the NCD, the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO; (2) the academic background, the professional responsibilities and annual salaries of Clyde E. Terry, Benro T. Ogunyipe, Billy W. Altom, Rabia Belt, James T. Brett, Bob Brown, Daniel M. Gade, Wendy S. Harbour, Neil Romano, Amged Soliman, Ana Torres-Davis, Anne Smmers, Phoebe Ball, Stacey S. Brown and Keith Woods; (3) all letters submitted by the NCD informing the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO that they were going to lead a fact-finding mission into the system of guardianship in the United States of America (U.S.A) (4) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the NCD March 22nd 2018 report entitled Beyond Guardianship: Toward Alternatives That Promote Greater Self-Determination; (5) your communications in the form of e- mails and postal correspondence about guardianships and/or conservatorships generally involving a state-court determination that an “individual lacks the capacity to make decisions with respect to their health, safety,welfare, and/or property;” (6) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal about guardianship entailing the “removal of rights protected by the U.S Constitution;” (7) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence the NCD position that (i) the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) is applicable to guardianship proceedings, (ii) the need for assistance with activities of daily living or even making decisions does not give rise to a presumption of incapacity and (iii) guardianship should be a last resort that is imposed only after less restrictive alternatives have been determined 6

9. to be inappropriate or ineffective; (8) feedbacks provided to the NCD by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO in response to their finding that (i) “there is a lack of data on existing guardianships and newly filed guardianships,” (ii) “people with disabilities are widely and erroneously seen as less capable of making autonomous decisions,” (iii) “people with disabilities are often denied due process in guardianship proceedings,” (iv) “capacity determinations often lack a sufficient scientific or evidentiary basis,” (v) “guardianship is considered protective, but courts often fail to protect individuals,” (vi) “most states statutes require consideration of less-restrictive alternatives, but courts and others in the guardianship system often do little to enforce this requirement,” (vii) “every state has a process for restoration, but this process is rarely used and can be complex, confusing, and cost prohibitive;” (9) feedbacks provided to the NCD by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO in response to their recommendation for (i) the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to collect data on whether or not the individuals they serve are subject to guardianship; (ii) states to be offered incentives and technical assistance with developing electronic filing and reporting systems that collect basic information about guardianships from the moment a petition is filed, (iii) the Department of Justice (DOJ), in collaboration with the HHS to issue guidance to states (specifically Adult Protective Services(APS) agencies and probate courts) on their legal obligations pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), (iv) the Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to create model supported decision making and powers-ofattorney forms geared toward transition age youth, (v) the Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) to instruct Parent Training and Information Centers to prioritize and provide meaningful training on school-to- adult transition and alternatives to guardianship, (vi) HHS to issue guidance regarding the responsibility of medical professionals and hospital to accommodate the needs of individuals who may need assistance making medical decisions, (vii) HHS to adequately explain procedures and draft documents provided to patients in plain language, (viii) medical professionals to be educated about the ADA and the need to accommodate people with disabilities, including those with intellectual disabilities and cognitive impairments, (ix) the National Home and Community Based Services Quality Enterprise (NQE) to include decision making assistance and use of alternatives to guardianship such as supported decision making in their priorities, (x) the NQE to include best practices as part of its resources, training, and technical assistance, (xi) the Administration for Community Living (ACL) to allocate funding to assist state adult protective services systems to develop greater awareness of ways to enhance the selfdetermination of adults considered vulnerable or in need of services, as well as the availability and use of alternatives to guardianship, (xii) the Developmental Disabilities Councils, University Centers for 7

10. Excellence in Developmental Disabilities (UCEDDs), and the Protection and Advocacy (P&A) organization to link work that has been done on advancing the self-determination of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities(ID/DD) with avoiding guardianship, (xiii) the Attorney General’s model legislation to incorporate the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship & Other Protective Arrangements Act (UGCOPAA) to include provisions for preventing unnecessary guardianships, (xiv) incapacitated individuals facing guardianship to be provided with independent legal representationthat will advocate for the individual’s desired outcome, especially if that person expresses a desire to avoid guardianship or objects to the proposed guardian, (xv) federal grant money to be made available to help promote the availability of counsel, (xvi) a state guardianship court improvement program to be funded to assist courts with developing and implementing best practices in guardianship, including training of judges and court personnel on due process rights and less-restrictive alternatives, (xvii) the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), National Institutes of Health, and other agencies that fund scientific research to provide grants to researchers who are trying to develop a better understanding of how people make decisions and how a variety of conditions – such as dementia, intellectual disabilities, brain injuries,and other disabilities – impact the ability of individuals to make and implement informed decisions, (xviii) resources to be geared toward developing functional approaches to capacity assessments that take into account the possibility that someone may need decision making assistance but not necessarily a surrogate or substitute decision maker, (xix) states to be provided with incentives to establish statewide boards that can provide for the accreditation and oversight of professional guardians, (xx) states to require family guardians to undergo training to ensure they understand their ongoing responsibilities to the person subject toguardianship and to the court, (xxi) the ACL grants to be expanded to be able to fund more geographically and demographically diverse projects and pilots that specifically test SDM models and use SDM and the court systems to restore people’s rights as a matter of law,particularly for people who are older adults with cognitive decline, people with psychosocialdisabilities, and people with severe intellectual disabilities, (xxii) the DOJ to make fundingavailable to train judges in the availability of alternatives to guardianship including, but notlimited to, supported decision making, (xxiii) the DOJ to develop guidance that recognizes alternatives to guardianship (…) even when it is determined that the individual meets thedefinition of incapacity, (xxiv) a grant to be given to the Protection and Advocacy system toprovide legal assistance to individuals who are trying to have their rights restored or avoidguardianship; (10) feedbacks provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD in response to the March 22nd 2018 report having found that the way “capacity determinations are made isdeeply problematic. Many states rely heavily on physicians and psychiatrists, who provideopinions that are based largely on generalities on a person’s diagnosis rather than on any observable trait of the particular individual. Although statutes that require a physician orpsychiatrist to report to the court regarding the capacity of the 8

11. individual are based on theassumption that these scientists will submit to the court an unbiased and scientifically basedopinion, physicians and psychiatrists are often not trained in administering the kinds of teststhat may provide the most insight into an individual’s ability to make decisions and might nothave the requisite skills and experience with the particular disability to render a validjudgment. (…) Even if they have a clinical basis for determining what a person can or cannotdo, the experts that make these determinations may not have sufficient legal context todetermine whether the individual is incapacitated as the law defines it. In one study, only 30 percent of doctors were able to correctly apply the definition of legal competence (capacity)in a fact-pattern drawn from an actual legal case. Additionally, although psychiatrists wereable to answer theoretical questions about the standards for legal capacity, they were oftenwrong when applying those standards to facts. In addition, only a small minority of doctorswere able to understand that a person could be diagnosed with dementia or depression andstill be legally competent. Medical doctors simply are trained in the legal, functional, andmedical assessments that could lead to a reliable determination regarding an individual’s capacity. (…) Even in the best-case scenario in which a physician with relevant expertise isappointed, the medical profession’s relationship to disability has historically been apaternalistic one. In medical terms, a patient benefits from anything that reverses orameliorates any disease or disability ‘…that threatens to shorten the life or limit thefunctional capacity of the patient. Harm is characterized as anything that impedes orcompromises the efficacy of those diagnostic or therapeutic measures.’ This weighs heavily in favor of restricting autonomy in an attempt to ensure safety and may inevitably lead tooverly restrictive guardianships;” (11) feedbacks provided to the NCD by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO in response to their March 22nd 2018 report having noted that “sexuality is anincredibly fraught topic for people with disabilities that raises issues not only about consentand mental capacity, but also ‘the forced sterilization of people with disabilities, the rights ofpeople with disabilities in institutions to have sex and be free from sexual abuse, and therights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people with disabilities. Against thiscomplex backdrop, NCD recognizes that ‘the desire to enter into intimate personalrelationships, including sexual relationships, is one of the most personal rights there is’ andthat ‘desire is no less important for the many adults with disabilities who are under someform of guardianship;’” (12) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the circumstances, which led to the much-publicized emotional duress and distress experienced by Britney Spears in 2007; (13) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer November 13th 2003 interview with Britney Spears; (14) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer noting on her interview with Britney Spears (dated November 13th 2003) that her net worth equated $100,000,000 (one hundred million) U.S dollars; (15) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer having noted that Britney Spears idolized Madonna; (16) your 9

12. communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer asking for Britney Spears reaction to remarks made by Kendall Ehrlich (wife of the former governor of the State of Maryland) saying: “Really, if I had an opportunity to shoot Britney Spears, I think I would;” (17) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears response to Diane Sawyer’s question; (18) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer failing to forcefully condemn on Television (T.V) Kendall Ehrlich encouraging for Britney Spears to incur physical harm; (19) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the much-publicized decision of Britney Spears to cut her hair on February 16th 2007; (20) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears having lost custody of her children with Kevin Federline on October 01st 2007; (21) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears involuntary civil commitment in the month of January 2008; (22) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears and her estate being placed under the temporary control of her father (Jamie Spears) and Andrew Wallet on or around February 01st 2008; (23) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears having vocally objected to her father being appointed as a guardian of her person and her estate in 2008; (24) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Jamie Spears having become the permanent guardian of Britney Spears in the month of October 2008; (25) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears net worth having decreased from over $100,000,000 (one hundred million) U.S dollars to $60,000,000 (sixty million) U.S dollars; (26) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Jamie Spears having been paid at least $5 million since the start of Britney Spears conservatorship in 2008; (27) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears having paid at least $3 million to Samuel D. Ingham since 2008; (28) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence with the National Council on Disability (NCD) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about (i) the circumstances surrounding Britney Spears conservatorship, (ii) the money pocketed by Jamie Spears since the beginning of Britney Spears conservatorship and (iii) the money pocketed by Samuel D. Ingham for his representation of Britney Spears since the beginning of her conservatorship;(29) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears having been informed that the terms and conditions of her conservatorship prohibiting her to get married and have children; (30) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the desire of Britney Spears (now aged 39 years old) to get married and have children; (31) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears testimony in the judicial branch of the California government, where she stated that she was being forced to take Lithium without her consent;xiii (32) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the amount of psychotropic drugs taken by Britney Spears despite her being a wellfunctioning and high-earning music superstar; (33) the list 10

13. of Britney Spears songs on your cell-phone, your tablet, your laptop and other music listening devices; (34) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the recently publicized decision of Britney Spears not to perform in concerts.” NCD has enclosed the requested salaries of NCD personnel from FY 2020. NCD has no other responsive records for this FOIA request. For tracking purposes, your tracking number is NCD-2021-12. If you need further assistance, you may contact Amy Nicholas, NCD’s FOIA Public Liaison at 202-272-2008 or anicholas@ncd.gov. Please include your tracking number with any correspondence. If needed, it is your right to seek dispute resolution services from NCD’s Public Liaison or the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). OGIS may be reached at: Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) National Archives and Records Administration 8601 Adelphi Road College Park, MD 20740-6001 OGIS@Nara.gov 202-741-5770 fax 202-741-5769 NCD’s appeal process allows you to appeal withheld information or the adequacy of NCD’s search by writing within 90 days of your receipt of this letter to: Anne Sommers McIntosh Executive Director National Council on Disability 1331 F St. NW. Suite 850 Washington DC 20004 Your appeal must be in writing and should contain a brief statement of the reasons why you believe the requested information should be released. Enclose a copy of your initial request, request number and a copy of this letter. Both the appeal letter and envelope should be prominently marked “Freedom of Information Act Appeal.” After processing, actual fees must be equal to or exceed $25 for the Council to require payment of fees. See 5 CFR §10,00010k. The fulfillment of your request did not exceed $25, therefore there is no billable fee for the processing of this request. Respectfully, 11

14. Joan Durocher Chief FOIA Officer 12

15. REQUEST FOR RECORDS W (AACL) Michael A. Ayele P.O.Box 20438 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia E-mail: waacl13@gmail.com ; waacl1313@gmail.com ; waacl42913@gmail.com Request for Records Hello, This is Michael A. Ayele sending this message though I now go by W. You may call me W. I am writing this letter to file a request for records with your offices. The bases for this records request are (1) the March 22nd 2018 National Council on Disability (NCD) report entitled Beyond Guardianship: Toward Alternatives That Promote Greater Self-Determination iand (2) the several deeply troubling aspects of Britney Spears conservatorship. 1)Request for Records My request for records are as follows. 1) What formal and informal ties exist between the National Council on Disability (NCD), the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the HHS Administration for Children and Families (ACF), the HHS Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the HHS Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the HHS Administration for Community Living (ACL), the HHS National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), the Department of Veteran Affairs (V.A), the Department of Education (DoED) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services (OSERS), the DoED Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), the National Home and Community-Based Services Quality Enterprise (NQE), the Developmental Disabilities Councils, University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities (UCEDDs), the Protection and Advocacy (P&A) organization, the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and your offices? Which undergraduate, graduate and law schools have Clyde E. Terry, Benro T. Ogunyipe, Billy W. Altom, Rabia Belt, James T. Brett, Bob Brown, Daniel M. Gade, Wendy S. Harbour, Neil Romano, Amged Soliman, Ana Torres-Davis, Anne Smmers, Phoebe Ball, Stacey S. Brown and Keith Woods previously attended and visited? What are their respective roles and responsibilities? How long have they been with the NCD? What are their annual salaries? 2) What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the NCD March 22nd 2018 report entitled Beyond Guardianship: Toward Alternatives That Promote Greater Self-Determination? iiHad the NCD previously informed the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO that they were going to lead a fact- finding mission into the system of guardianship in the United States of America (U.S.A)?What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about guardianships and/or conservatorships generally involving a state-court determination that an “individual lacks the capacity to make decisions with respect to their health, safety, welfare, and/or property?”What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about guardianships entailing the “removal of rights protected by the U.S Constitution?” What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the NCD position that (i) the American with Disabilities July 19th 2021 W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 1

16. REQUEST FOR RECORDS Act (ADA) is applicable to guardianship proceedings, (ii) the need for assistance with activities of daily living or even making decisions does not give rise to a presumption of incapacity and (iii) guardianship should be a last resort that is imposed only after less restrictive alternatives have been determined to be inappropriate or ineffective? (See page 19 of the NCD March 22nd 2018 report.)What feedback were provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD finding that (i) “there is a lack of data on existing guardianships and newly filed guardianships,”(ii) “people with disabilities are widely and erroneously seen as less capable of making autonomous decisions,” (iii) “people with disabilities are often denied due process in guardianship proceedings,” (iv) “capacity determinations often lack a sufficient scientific or evidentiary basis,” (v) “guardianship is considered protective, but courts often fail to protect individuals,” (vi) “most states statutes require consideration of less-restrictive alternatives, but courts and others in the guardianship system often do little to enforce this requirement,”(vii) “every state has a process for restoration, but this process is rarely used and can be complex, confusing, and cost prohibitive?” (See pages 18 – 24 of the NCD March 22nd 2018 report.) What feedbacks were provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD recommending for (i) the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to collect data on whether or not the individuals they serve are subject to guardianship; (ii) states to be offered incentives and technical assistance with developing electronic filing andreporting systems that collect basic information about guardianships from the moment a petition is filed, (iii) the Department of Justice (DOJ), in collaboration with the HHS to issue guidance to states (specifically Adult Protective Services (APS) agencies and probate courts) on their legal obligations pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), (iv) the Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to create model supported decision making and powers-of-attorney forms geared toward transition age youth, (v) the Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) to instruct Parent Training and Information Centers to prioritize and provide meaningful training on school-to- adult transition and alternatives to guardianship, (vi) HHS to issue guidance regarding the responsibility of medical professionals and hospital to accommodate the needs of individuals who may need assistance making medical decisions, (vii) HHS to adequately explain procedures and draft documents provided to patients in plain language, (viii) medical professionals to be educated about the ADA and the need to accommodate people with disabilities, including those with intellectual disabilities and cognitive impairments, (ix) the National Home and Community Based Services Quality Enterprise (NQE) to include decision making assistance and use of alternatives to guardianship such as supported decision making in their priorities, (x) the NQE to include best practices as part of its resources, training, and technical assistance, (xi) the Administration for Community Living (ACL) to allocate funding to assist state adult protective services systems to develop greater awareness of ways to enhance the self-determination of adults considered vulnerable or in need of services, as well as the availability and use of alternatives to guardianship, (xii) the Developmental Disabilities Councils, University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities (UCEDDs), and the Protection and Advocacy (P&A) organization to link work that has been done on advancing the self-determination of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (ID/DD) with avoiding guardianship, (xiii) the Attorney General’s model legislation to incorporate the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship & Other Protective W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 2

17. REQUEST FOR RECORDS Arrangements Act (UGCOPAA) to include provisions for preventing unnecessary guardianships, (xiv) incapacitated individuals facing guardianship to be provided with independent legal representation that will advocate for the individual’s desired outcome, especially if that person expresses a desire to avoid guardianship or objects to the proposed guardian, (xv) federal grant money to be made available to help promote the availability of counsel, (xvi)a state guardianship court improvement program to be funded to assist courts with developing and implementing best practices in guardianship, including training of judges and court personnel on due process rights and less-restrictive alternatives, (xvii) the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), National Institutes of Health, and other agencies that fund scientific research to provide grants to researchers who are trying to develop a better understanding of how people make decisions and how a variety of conditions– such as dementia, intellectual disabilities, brain injuries, and other disabilities – impact the ability of individuals to make and implement informed decisions, (xviii) resources to be geared toward developing functional approaches to capacity assessments that take into account the possibility that someone may need decision making assistance but not necessarily a surrogate or substitute decision maker, (xix) states to be provided with incentives to establish statewide boards that can provide for the accreditation and oversight of professional guardians, (xx) states to require family guardians to undergo training to ensure they understand their ongoing responsibilities to the person subject to guardianship and to the court, (xxi) the ACL grants to be expanded to be able to fund more geographically and demographically diverse projects and pilots that specifically test SDM models and use SDM and the court systems to restore people’s rights as a matter of law, particularly for people who are older adults with cognitive decline, people with psychosocial disabilities, and people with severe intellectual disabilities, (xxii) the DOJ to make funding available to train judges in the availability of alternatives to guardianship including, but not limited to, supported decision making, (xxiii) the DOJ to develop guidance that recognizes alternatives to guardianship (…) even when it is determined that the individual meets the definition of incapacity, (xxiv) a grant to be given to the Protection and Advocacy system to provide legal assistance to individuals who are trying to have their rights restored or avoid guardianship? (See pages 18 – 24 of the NCD March 22nd 2018 report.) What feedback were provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD March 22nd2018 report having noted that the way “capacity determinations are made is deeply problematic. Many states rely heavily on physicians and psychiatrists, who provide opinions that are based largely on generalities on a person’s diagnosis rather than on any observable trait of the particular individual. Although statutes that require a physician or psychiatrist to report to the court regarding the capacity of the individual are based on the assumption that these scientists will submit to the court an unbiased and scientifically based opinion, physicians and psychiatrists are often not trained in administering the kinds of tests that may provide the most insight into an individual’s ability to make decisions and might not have the requisite skills and experience with the particular disability to render a valid judgment. (…) Even if they have a clinical basis for determining what a person can or cannot do, the experts that make these determinations may not have sufficient legal context to determine whether the individual is incapacitated as the law defines it. In one study, only 30 percent of doctors were able to correctly apply the definition of legal competence (capacity) in a fact-pattern drawn from an actual legal case. Additionally, although psychiatrists were able to answer theoretical questions about the standards for legal capacity, they were often wrong when applying those standards to facts. In addition, only a small minority of doctors were able to understand that a person could be diagnosed with dementia or depression and W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 3

18. REQUEST FOR RECORDS still be legally competent. Medical doctors simply are trained in the legal, functional, and medical assessments that could lead to a reliable determination regarding an individual’s capacity. (…) Even in the best-case scenario in which a physician with relevant expertise is appointed, the medical profession’s relationship to disability has historically been a paternalistic one. In medical terms, a patient benefits from anything that reverses or ameliorates any disease or disability ‘…that threatens to shorten the life or limit the functional capacity of the patient. Harm is characterized as anything that impedes or compromises the efficacy of those diagnostic or therapeutic measures.’ This weighs heavily in favor of restricting autonomy in an attempt to ensure safety and may inevitably lead to overly restrictive guardianships?” (See pages 77 - 80 of the report.) What feedback were provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD having noted in their March 22nd 2018 report that “sexuality is an incredibly fraught topic for people with disabilities that raises issues not only about consent and mental capacity, but also ‘the forced sterilization of people with disabilities, the rights of people with disabilities in institutions to have sex and be free from sexual abuse, and the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people with disabilities. Against this complex backdrop, NCD recognizes that ‘the desire to enter into intimate personal relationships, including sexual relationships, is one of the most personal rights there is’ and that ‘desire is no less important for the many adults with disabilities who are under some form of guardianship?’” (See page 106 of the report.) 3) What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the circumstances, which led to the much-publicized emotional duress and distress experienced by Britney Spears in 2007? Specifically, what communications in the form of e- mails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer November 13th 2003 interview of Britney Spears? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer noting on her interview with Britney Spears (dated November 13th 2003) that her net worth equated $100,000,000 (one hundred million) U.S dollars? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer having noted that Britney Spears idolized Madonna? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer asking for Britney Spears reaction to remarks made by Kendall Ehrlich (wife of the former governor of the State of Maryland) saying: “Really, if I had an opportunity to shoot Britney Spears, I think I would?”What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears response to Diane Sawyer’s question? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Diane Sawyer failing to forcefully condemn on Television (T.V) Kendall Ehrlich encouraging for Britney Spears to incur physical harm? iii What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the much-publicized decision of Britney Spears to cut her hair on February 16th 2007? iv What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears having lost custody of her children with Kevin Federline on October 01st 2007? v What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears involuntary civil commitment in the month of January 2008? vi What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears and her estate being placed under the temporary control of her father (Jamie Spears) and Andrew Wallet on or around February 01st 2008? vii What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears having vocally objected to her father being appointed as a guardian of her person and her estate in 2008? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Jamie Spears having W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 4

19. REQUEST FOR RECORDS become the permanent guardian of Britney Spears in the month of October 2008? viii What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears net worth having decreased from over $100,000,000 (one hundred million) U.S dollars to $60,000,000 (sixty million) U.S dollars? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Jamie Spears having been paid at least $5 million since the start of Britney Spears conservatorship in 2008? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears having paid at least $3 million to Samuel D. Ingham since 2008? ix What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have been exchanged between the National Council on Disability (NCD) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about (i) the circumstances surrounding Britney Spears conservatorship, (ii) the money pocketed by Jamie Spears since the beginning of Britney Spears conservatorship and (iii) the money pocketed by Samuel D. Ingham for his representation of Britney Spears since the beginning of her conservatorship? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about Britney Spears having previously been informed that the terms and conditions of her conservatorship prohibited her to get married and have children? x What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you had about the desire of Britney Spears (now aged 39 years old) to get married and have children? xi What songs of Britney Spears do you have on your cell-phone, your tablet, your laptop and other music listening devices? What communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence have you have you had about Britney Spears recently publicized decision to no longer perform in concerts? xii What I am requesting for prompt disclosure are all records within your possession detailing (1) formal and informal ties existing between the NCD, the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO; (2) the academic background, the professional responsibilities and annual salaries of Clyde E. Terry, Benro T. Ogunyipe, Billy W. Altom, Rabia Belt, James T. Brett, Bob Brown, Daniel M. Gade, Wendy S. Harbour, Neil Romano, Amged Soliman, Ana Torres-Davis, Anne Smmers, Phoebe Ball, Stacey S. Brown and Keith Woods; (3) all letters submitted by the NCD informing the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO that they were going to lead a fact-finding mission into the system of guardianship in the United States of America (U.S.A) (4) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the NCD March 22nd 2018 report entitled Beyond Guardianship: Toward Alternatives That Promote Greater Self- Determination; (5) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about guardianships and/or conservatorships generally involving a state-court determination that an “individual lacks the capacity to make decisions with respect to their health, safety, welfare, and/or property;” (6) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal about guardianship entailing the “removal of rights protected by the U.S Constitution;” (7) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence the NCD position that (i) the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) is applicable to guardianship proceedings, (ii) the need for assistance with activities of daily living or even making decisions does not give rise to a presumption of incapacity and (iii) guardianship should be a last resort that is imposed only after less restrictive alternatives have been determined to be inappropriate or ineffective; (8) feedbacks provided to the NCD by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO in response to W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 5

20. REQUEST FOR RECORDS their finding that (i) “there is a lack of data on existing guardianships and newly filed guardianships,”(ii) “people with disabilities are widely and erroneously seen as less capable of making autonomous decisions,” (iii) “people with disabilities are often denied due process in guardianship proceedings,” (iv) “capacity determinations often lack a sufficient scientific or evidentiary basis,” (v) “guardianship is considered protective, but courts often fail to protect individuals,” (vi) “most states statutes require consideration of less-restrictive alternatives, but courts and others in the guardianship system often do little to enforce this requirement,”(vii) “every state has a process for restoration, but this process is rarely used and can be complex, confusing, and cost prohibitive;” (9) feedbacks provided to the NCD by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO in response to their recommendation for (i) the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to collect data on whether or not the individuals they serve are subject to guardianship; (ii) states to be offered incentives and technical assistance with developing electronic filing andreporting systems that collect basic information about guardianships from the moment a petition is filed, (iii) the Department of Justice (DOJ), in collaboration with the HHS to issue guidance to states (specifically Adult Protective Services (APS) agencies and probate courts) on their legal obligations pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), (iv) the Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) to create model supported decision making and powers-of- attorney forms geared toward transition age youth, (v) the Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) to instruct Parent Training and Information Centers to prioritize and provide meaningful training on school-to-adult transition and alternatives to guardianship, (vi) HHS to issue guidance regarding the responsibility of medical professionals and hospital to accommodate the needs of individuals who may need assistance making medical decisions, (vii) HHS to adequately explain procedures and draft documents provided to patients in plain language, (viii) medical professionals to be educated about the ADA and the need to accommodate people with disabilities, including those with intellectual disabilities and cognitive impairments, (ix) the National Home and Community Based Services Quality Enterprise (NQE) to include decision making assistance and use of alternatives to guardianship such as supported decision making in their priorities, (x) the NQE to include best practices as part of its resources, training, and technical assistance, (xi) the Administration for Community Living (ACL) to allocate funding to assist state adult protective services systems to develop greater awareness of ways to enhance the self- determination of adults considered vulnerable or in need of services, as well as the availability and use of alternatives to guardianship, (xii) the Developmental Disabilities Councils, University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities (UCEDDs), and the Protection and Advocacy (P&A) organization to link work that has been done on advancing the self-determination of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (ID/DD) with avoiding guardianship, (xiii) the Attorney General’s model legislation to incorporate the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship & Other Protective Arrangements Act (UGCOPAA) to include provisions for preventing unnecessary guardianships, (xiv) incapacitated individuals facing guardianship to be provided with independent legal representation that will advocate for the individual’s desired outcome, especially if that person expresses a desire to avoid guardianship or objects to the proposed guardian, (xv) federal grant money to be made available to help promote the availability of counsel, (xvi)a state guardianship court improvement program to be funded to assist courts with developing and implementing best practices in guardianship, including training of judges and court W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 6

21. REQUEST FOR RECORDS personnel on due process rights and less-restrictive alternatives, (xvii) the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), National Institutes of Health, and other agencies that fund scientific research to provide grants to researchers who are trying to develop a better understanding of how people make decisions and how a variety of conditions– such as dementia, intellectual disabilities, brain injuries, and other disabilities – impact the ability of individuals to make and implement informed decisions, (xviii) resources to be geared toward developing functional approaches to capacity assessments that take into account the possibility that someone may need decision making assistance but not necessarily a surrogate or substitute decision maker, (xix) states to be provided with incentives to establish statewide boards that can provide for the accreditation and oversight of professional guardians, (xx) states to require family guardians to undergo training to ensure they understand their ongoing responsibilities to the person subject to guardianship and to the court, (xxi) the ACL grants to be expanded to be able to fund more geographically and demographically diverse projects and pilots that specifically test SDM models and use SDM and the court systems to restore people’s rights as a matter of law, particularly for people who are older adults with cognitive decline, people with psychosocial disabilities, and people with severe intellectual disabilities, (xxii) the DOJ to make funding available to train judges in the availability of alternatives to guardianship including, but not limited to, supported decision making, (xxiii) the DOJ to develop guidance that recognizes alternatives to guardianship (…) even when it is determined that the individual meets the definition of incapacity, (xxiv) a grant to be given to the Protection and Advocacy system to provide legal assistance to individuals who are trying to have their rights restored or avoid guardianship; (10) feedbacks provided by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO to the NCD in response to the March 22nd 2018 report having found that the way “capacity determinations are made is deeply problematic. Many states rely heavily on physicians and psychiatrists, who provide opinions that are based largely on generalities on a person’s diagnosis rather than on any observable trait of the particular individual. Although statutes that require a physician or psychiatrist to report to the court regarding the capacity of the individual are based on the assumption that these scientists will submit to the court an unbiased and scientifically based opinion, physicians and psychiatrists are often not trained in administering the kinds of tests that may provide the most insight into an individual’s ability to make decisions and might not have the requisite skills and experience with the particular disability to render a valid judgment. (…) Even if they have a clinical basis for determining what a person can or cannot do, the experts that make these determinations may not have sufficient legal context to determine whether the individual is incapacitated as the law defines it. In one study, only 30 percent of doctors were able to correctly apply the definition of legal competence (capacity) in a fact-pattern drawn from an actual legal case. Additionally, although psychiatrists were able to answer theoretical questions about the standards for legal capacity, they were often wrong when applying those standards to facts. In addition, only a small minority of doctors were able to understand that a person could be diagnosed with dementia or depression and still be legally competent. Medical doctors simply are trained in the legal, functional, and medical assessments that could lead to a reliable determination regarding an individual’s capacity. (…) Even in the best-case scenario in which a physician with relevant expertise is appointed, the medical profession’s relationship to disability has historically been a paternalistic one. In medical terms, a patient benefits from anything that reverses or ameliorates any disease or disability ‘…that threatens to shorten the life or limit the functional capacity of the patient. Harm is characterized as anything that impedes or compromises the efficacy of those diagnostic or therapeutic measures.’ This weighs heavily W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 7

22. REQUEST FOR RECORDS in favor of restricting autonomy in an attempt to ensure safety and may inevitably lead to overly restrictive guardianships;” (11) feedbacks provided to the NCD by the HHS (CMS), the HHS (SAMHSA), the HHS (ACL), the HHS (NIH), the NIDLILRR, the V.A, the DoED (OSEP), the DoED (OSERS), the NQE, the UCEDD, the P&A, the DOJ, the SSA and the GAO in response to their March 22nd 2018 report having noted that “sexuality is an incredibly fraught topic for people with disabilities that raises issues not only about consent and mental capacity, but also ‘the forced sterilization of people with disabilities, the rights of people with disabilities in institutions to have sex and be free from sexual abuse, and the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people with disabilities. Against this complex backdrop, NCD recognizes that ‘the desire to enter into intimate personal relationships, including sexual relationships, is one of the most personal rights there is’ and that ‘desire is no less important for the many adults with disabilities who are under some form of guardianship;’” (12) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the circumstances, which led to the much-publicized emotional duress and distress experienced by Britney Spears in 2007; (13) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer November 13th 2003 interview with Britney Spears; (14) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer noting on her interview with Britney Spears (dated November 13th 2003) that her net worth equated $100,000,000 (one hundred million) U.S dollars; (15) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer having noted that Britney Spears idolized Madonna; (16) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer asking for Britney Spears reaction to remarks made by Kendall Ehrlich (wife of the former governor of the State of Maryland) saying: “Really, if I had an opportunity to shoot Britney Spears, I think I would;” (17) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears response to Diane Sawyer’s question; (18) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Diane Sawyer failing to forcefully condemn on Television (T.V) Kendall Ehrlich encouraging for Britney Spears to incur physical harm; (19) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the much-publicized decision of Britney Spears to cut her hair on February 16th 2007; (20) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears having lost custody of her children with Kevin Federline on October 01st 2007; (21) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears involuntary civil commitment in the month of January 2008; (22) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears and her estate being placed under the temporary control of her father (Jamie Spears) and Andrew Wallet on or around February 01st 2008; (23) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears having vocally objected to her father being appointed as a guardian of her person and her estate in 2008; (24) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Jamie Spears having become the permanent guardian of Britney Spears in the month of October 2008; (25) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears net worth having decreased from over $100,000,000 (one hundred million) U.S dollars to $60,000,000 (sixty million) U.S dollars; (26) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Jamie Spears having been paid at least $5 million since the start of Britney Spears conservatorship in 2008; (27) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears having paid at least $3 million to Samuel D. Ingham since 2008; (28) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence with the National Council on Disability (NCD) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about (i) the circumstances surrounding Britney Spears conservatorship, (ii) the money pocketed by Jamie Spears since W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 8

23. REQUEST FOR RECORDS the beginning of Britney Spears conservatorship and (iii) the money pocketed by Samuel D. Ingham for his representation of Britney Spears since the beginning of her conservatorship; (29) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears having been informed that the terms and conditions of her conservatorship prohibited her to get married and have children; (30) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the desire of Britney Spears (now aged 39 years old) to get married and have children; (31) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about Britney Spears testimony in the judicial branch of the California government, where she stated that she was being forced to take Lithium without her consent;xiii (32) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the amount of psychotropic drugs taken by Britney Spears despite her being a well- functioning and high-earning music superstar; (33) the list of Britney Spears songs on your cell-phone, your tablet, your laptop and other music listening devices; (34) your communications in the form of e-mails and postal correspondence about the recently publicized decision of Britney Spears not to perform in concerts. 2)Request for a Fee Waiver and Expedited Processing The requested records have posed an imminent threat to the physical safety and well-being of Britney Spears. The NCD has previously recognized that (1) guardianships and/or conservatorships generally involve a state-court determination that an “individual lacks the capacity to make decisions with respect to their health, safety, welfare, and/or property;” (2) guardianships entail the “removal of rights protected by the U.S Constitution.” On these bases alone, I believe this request for records should be expedited and all fees waived. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I instinctively presume that guardianships are unnecessary and that there may be less restrictive alternatives that can address the individual’s need. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I have previously asked whether conditions or environmental factors that may be affecting decision making ability could be mitigated or reversed, alleviating the need for guardianship. Indeed, I first became somewhat familiar with the system of guardianship in Fiscal Year (F.Y) 2013, when I was a public employee of the Department of Mental Health (DMH) Fulton State Hospital (FSH) located 600 East 5th Street, Fulton, Missouri. As a former employee of the DMH (FSH), I had previously objected to the selective appointment of a translator to patient/prisoner Muhammer Suljacer, then held in the FSH Biggs Forensic Center (BFC) Social Learning Program (SLP). Patient/prisoner Muhammer Suljacer was at the time I was a public employee of the FSH a person who came to the USA at the age of 4 and had according to his personal health information (PHI) a “high-school education.” His PHI had also noted that he spoke English fluently and that he came to the USA from Bosnia, Europe. Living in the same ward as Muhammer Suljacer in F.Y 2013 was patient/prisoner Aschalew Belachew, who came to the U.S.A in the 1980s from Ethiopia. According to his PHI, Aschalew Belachew spoke English with a “low-tone of voice.” As a former employee of the FSH who had experience speaking English with people all over the world, I had a very difficult time understanding Aschalew Belachew whenever he spoke to me in English. However, I understood him perfectly when he spoke in Amharic: the official language of Ethiopia. In my conversations with him, I gleaned that he was from the northern part of Ethiopia, very possibly Tigray: a region neighboring Eritrea. As a former employee of the FSH, I would like to attest that I was subjected to negative glares whenever I spoke to Aschalew Belachew in Amharic. As a former employee of the FSH, I objected to Aschalew Belachew not having been appointed a translator even though Muhammer Suljacer had a W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 9

24. REQUEST FOR RECORDS translator. As a former employee of the FSH, I would like to attest that Muhammer Suljacer was much more fluent in English than Aschalew Belachew. I would again like to reiterate this point I had previously made in my former capacity as a Forensic Rehab Specialist (FRS) of the DMH (FSH). As a former employee of the FSH, I was never opposed to the appointment of a translator for Muhammer Suljacer as part of his “treatment plan.” Nonetheless, I thought it was problematic that Ashcalew Belachew did not have a translator even though his English was significantly less fluent than that of Muhammer Suljacer. As a former employee of the FSH, I believed this discrepancy in the service of healthcare was discriminatory. I also believed that this discrepancy in the service of healthcare was inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). For your information (FYI), Aschalew Belachew was at the time I was a public employee of the FSH a patient/prisoner with a guardian. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I was shocked by Britney Spears testimony in the judicial branch of the California government. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I do believe that any terms and conditions of a guardianship, which would prohibit people to get married and have children is outrageous. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I don’t believe forcing people (struggling with depression) to take psychotropic drugs (such as Lithium) without their consent is something that should be condoned. I, personally find it abhorrent. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I have serious concerns about the quality of legal and medical care provided to Britney Spears. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I have been following the career of Britney Spears because I enjoy listening to her songs: I do think she’s an extremely talented artist. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I do believe the psychotropic drugs have taken a toll on her. In several photographs taken of her following her fall-out with the media, I have noticed that she looked significantly older than her relatively young age of 39. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I do believe the psychotropic drugs she begun taking following her 2007 meltdown played a significant role in her looking older than her age. As a representative of the media and a member of the general public, I have come to be deeply concerned about several aspects of her conservatorship. Take care. FREE BRITNEY SPEARS! I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that all the statements I have made are to the best of my knowledge true and accurate. Respectfully submitted: W (AACL) Michael A. Ayele Anti-Racist Human Rights Activist Audio-Visual Media Analyst Anti-Propaganda Journalist W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 10

25. REQUEST FOR RECORDS Work Cited iBeyond Guardianship: Toward Alternatives That Promote Greater Self-Determination for People With Disabilities, National Council on Disability.: https://ncd.gov/publications/2018/beyond-guardianship-toward-alternatives iiBeyond Guardianship: Toward Alternatives That Promote Greater Self-Determination for People With Disabilities, National Council on Disability.: https://ncd.gov/publications/2018/beyond-guardianship-toward-alternatives iiiBritney Spears Primetime Interview With Diane Sawyer 2003, Youtube.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4CvSRCA9Ro ivBritney Spears reveals devastating reason she shaved her head during 2007 public meltdown, The Sun.: https://www.the-sun.com/entertainment/2350620/britney-spears-reason- shaved-head-public-meltdown/ vBritney Spears loses custody of her children, The Guardian.: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/oct/02/pop.usa viBritney Spears taken to LA hospital after custody standoff, Reuters.: https://www.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-31245020080104 Britney Spears on psychiatric hold in hospital, Reuters.: https://www.reuters.com/article/us- spears-hospital/britney-spears-on-psychiatric-hold-in-hospital-idUSN3128619820080201 viiCourt gives father control of money, The Guardian.: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/02/musicnews.usa viii‘Framing Britney Spears’Full Documentary # Free Britney, YouTube.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=937Cli3jIqM ixHow much has 13 years under conservatorship cost Britney Spears, Market Watch.: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-much-has-13-years-under-conservatorship- cost-britney-spears- 11624654464#:~:text=As%20a%20result%2C%20Spears%20has,%2460%20million%2C%2 0according%20to%20Forbes. xBritney Spears FULL Conservatorship Hearing (Leaked HQ Audio) Opening Testimony; YouTube.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVrhKBhMrEI Can Britney Spears’ Conservators Legally Bar Her From Having a Baby? Rolling Stone.: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/britney-spears-conservators-baby-marriage- rights-1188207/ xiPlanned Parenthood reacts to Britney Spears’ IUD allegation,CBS.: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/planned-parenthood-britney-spears-iud/ W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 11

26. REQUEST FOR RECORDS xiiBritney Spears says won’t perform while her father controls career; Reuters.: https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/britney-spears-says-wont-perform-while-her-father- controls-career-2021-07-18/ xiiiBritney Spears FULL Conservatorship Hearing (Leaked HQ Audio) Opening Testimony; YouTube.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVrhKBhMrEI W (AACL) - MICHAEL A. AYELE 12