[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i thought it was financial control, but it seems to be much more far reaching than that

It seems like financial control doesn't just mean management of the finances she already has - it also means managing what she does/her work and "making money" which is utterly bizarre. Especially if they're saying she has a serious chronic (and in fact terminal) condition. Dementia prognosis is not good. Why on earth would they be sending her out to do more work, if their concern was for her health.

If you're just concerned about someone being responsible for their financial position and not able to control that themself, all that's really needed is control over the estate, the person given a reasonable "allowance" from their estate to do whatever they want with (without access to the bulk to risk bankrupting themself) and a requirement that they co-sign any contract or legal document (to keep them protected from making poor "big decisions" and from scams).

That's not uncommon when people are vulnerable; mainly for that last part (keeping them protected from scammers who will take advantage). But day to day spending and living? Should ALL still be up to them unless they are profoundly disabled. In this case, she quite clearly is not, and they don't consider her to be either, because they've had her on TV and doing shows!